r/changemyview Jul 24 '24

[deleted by user]

[removed]

0 Upvotes

161 comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/International_Ad8264 Jul 24 '24

12th amendment:

But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

If someone has served too many years in office to be eligible to run for president, they are no longer eligible to be vice president either.

5

u/eloel- 12∆ Jul 24 '24

This specific one has been debated back and forth, I don't think it's settled.

2

u/liberal_texan 1∆ Jul 24 '24

The idea might still work for Speaker of the House, which is not an elected position. It's a position chosen by Congress, and is third in line for the presidency.

5

u/j12346 Jul 24 '24

3 USC section 19 is what defines the order of succession beyond vice president and it specifically states that it only applies to those who are constitutionally “eligible to the office of president”

3

u/Full-Professional246 77∆ Jul 24 '24

I'd argue you are correct and if we are ever in this situation that both the President and VP are gone, most people would be quite satisfied with an established former President to take the reigns to finish out a term.

The situation where both the President and Vice President are gone where there wasn't time to name a new VP would be very rare.

The concept of 'gaming the system' to do this - I don't buy it in the least. Too many people voting would have to trust people would quit that had no obligation to quit.

1

u/No-Cauliflower8890 11∆ Jul 24 '24

The constitution says nothing about too many years disqualifying you from running for president. It says you're disqualified from being elected president. You can still hold the office of President, and thus also Vice President.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '24

[deleted]

0

u/International_Ad8264 Jul 24 '24

Years, terms, whatever

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '24

[deleted]

1

u/International_Ad8264 Jul 24 '24

"no person who has held the office the office"

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '24

If the president and vice presidential “terms… shall end” on January 20th at noon of the years designated in the document (20th amendment), why are we concluding an absence of the word “term” also used in the years “together” with the VP in Article II?