Presidential Succession: Is The 1947 Act Constitutional?

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is a federal statute that outlines the line of succession in the event of a double vacancy in the presidency and vice presidency. The act has been criticised as being unconstitutional, with concerns raised over the inclusion of members of Congress in the line of succession. The act reinserted the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate in the line of succession, ahead of executive cabinet officials. This has sparked debate over whether these individuals are 'officers in the sense intended by Article II of the Constitution and therefore constitutionally eligible to succeed the presidency. The act also allows for the 'bumping' of an acting president, where they can be supplanted by an officer higher in the order of succession.

Explore related products

Presidential Succession ACT

$29.81

House Hearing, 108th Congress: Presidential Succession ACT

$17.75

Emanuel Celler: Immigration and Civil Rights Champion

$25 $35

Reforming American Government: The Bicentennial Papers Of The Committee On The Constitutional System

$55.99 $55.99

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$240.21 $359

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$104.97 $126.95

Is the Speaker of the House eligible to succeed the President?

The eligibility of the Speaker of the House to succeed the President has been a matter of debate for many years. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947, which was signed into law on July 18, 1947, by President Harry Truman, reinstated the Speaker of the House in the line of succession after they had been removed by Congress in 1886. The Act placed the Speaker of the House second in the line of succession, after the Vice President and ahead of the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

The controversy surrounding the eligibility of the Speaker of the House arises from the interpretation of the term "Officer" in Article II, Section 1, Clause 6 of the Constitution, also known as the Succession Clause. This clause authorises Congress to enact a statute establishing the presidential line of succession and designates that only an "Officer" may be designated as a presidential successor. The question is whether the Speaker of the House is an "Officer" in the sense intended by Article II of the Constitution and therefore constitutionally eligible to succeed the President.

Some constitutional scholars, including M. Miller Baker, argue that the Speaker of the House is not an "Officer" as defined by the Succession Clause and, therefore, is not eligible to act as President. They interpret the term "Officer" to refer specifically to an "Officer of the United States," which excludes members of Congress. Additionally, the Ineligibility Clause of Article I, Section VI states that "no Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States." This clause suggests that a member of the House of Representatives, such as the Speaker, cannot simultaneously hold another civil office, including the presidency.

However, others argue that the Speaker of the House is an elected official and, therefore, should be eligible to succeed the President. This argument reflects Truman's belief that the presidency should, whenever possible, "be filled by an elective officer." Additionally, the Speaker of the the House's role as the presiding officer of the House of Representatives and the leader of the body's majority party may be considered qualifications for the presidency.

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 has been widely criticised as unconstitutional, and there are concerns that it could deprive the United States of clear executive authority in critical moments. However, it is important to note that none of the succession acts, including the 1947 Act, have ever been invoked. The likelihood that a person beyond the vice president in the line of succession will be called upon to act as president has diminished in recent years due to the establishment of procedures for filling vice presidential vacancies.

Should elected Members of the House and Senate be first in line?

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947, signed into law by President Harry Truman, restored the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate to the line of succession. This has been a controversial topic, with some questioning the constitutionality of the Act.

The Constitution's Succession Clause (Article II, Section 1, Clause 6) specifies that only an "Officer" may be designated as a presidential successor. The term "Officer" is considered by constitutional scholars to refer to an "Officer of the United States," excluding members of Congress. As a result, there are concerns that the 1947 Act may be unconstitutional as the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore may not be considered "Officers" eligible to act as President.

On the other hand, supporters of the 1947 Act argue that it reflects the belief that the President should not appoint their immediate successor and that the presidency should be filled by an elected official whenever possible. The Speaker and the President Pro Tempore are elected officials, while Cabinet officials are appointed by the President. Additionally, the 1947 Act addresses concerns about maintaining party continuity in the event of a presidential vacancy.

Those who oppose the inclusion of the Speaker and the President Pro Tempore in the line of succession argue that it can lead to abrupt changes in the presidency's political party mid-term. They also highlight the concern that the succession line is ordered by the dates of creation of executive departments rather than the skills or capacities of the individuals serving as secretaries.

The debate surrounding the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 and the role of elected Members of the House and Senate in the line of succession is complex and multifaceted. It involves constitutional, political, and philosophical considerations. Ultimately, the decision of whether elected Members of the House and Senate should be first in line involves weighing the advantages of having an elected official assume the presidency against the potential constitutional issues and concerns over party continuity and leadership skills.

Can an Acting President be 'bumped' by a higher-ranking officer?

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 outlines the order of succession in the event that the U.S. President cannot carry out their duties. The Act states that any person serving as Acting President can be supplanted or "bumped" from the acting presidency by an officer higher in the order of succession. The order of succession consists of congressional officers, followed by members of the Cabinet in the order of the establishment of each department.

The 1947 Act has been criticised as being "unconstitutional", as there is controversy over whether the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate are "officers" in the sense intended by Article II of the Constitution, and therefore constitutionally eligible to succeed to the presidency. The Constitution's Succession Clause specifies that only an "Officer" may be designated as a presidential successor, and it has been argued that this term refers specifically to an "Officer of the United States", excluding members of Congress.

The 25th Amendment, Section 1, clarifies that the vice president is the direct successor of the president and becomes president if the incumbent dies, resigns, or is removed from office. The Amendment also establishes procedures for filling an intra-term vacancy in the office of the vice president.

In summary, an Acting President can be "bumped" by a higher-ranking officer in the line of succession as outlined in the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. However, the eligibility of certain officers, such as the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, to be included in the line of succession is a matter of ongoing debate.

Explore related products

An Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100+ Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

$26 $34.95

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$305

Constitutional Law: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$8.32 $8.95

Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$100 $345

A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law

$28

Constitutional Law For Dummies

$18 $29.99

Does the 1947 Act threaten clear Executive authority?

The 1947 Presidential Succession Act, signed by President Harry Truman, has been criticised as a threat to clear executive authority in the United States. This is because the Act places the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem of the Senate in the line of succession, which some argue is unconstitutional.

The Act outlines that in the event of a double vacancy in the presidency and vice presidency, the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem of the Senate would assume the presidency before appointed members of the executive branch. This change was driven by the belief that elected congressional officials would represent a more democratic choice for succession. However, there has been controversy over whether the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem of the Senate are "officers" in the sense intended by Article II of the Constitution, and therefore constitutionally eligible to succeed to the presidency.

Constitutional scholars, including M. Miller Baker, have argued that the term "'officer'" in the Constitution's Succession Clause refers specifically to an "Officer of the United States", excluding members of Congress. Baker further states that the 1947 Act is "probably unconstitutional" because the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem are not eligible to act as President within the meaning of the Succession Clause.

The inclusion of congressional leaders in the line of succession has been criticised as threatening clear executive authority. This is because it introduces the potential for political and philosophical differences in the succession process, such as whether officers in line to succeed the President should be elected Members of the House and Senate or appointed Cabinet officers. Additionally, the 1947 Act allows for the "'bumping'" or supplantation of an Acting President by an officer higher in the order of succession, which could further complicate the succession process and potentially delay the establishment of clear executive authority.

In conclusion, the 1947 Presidential Succession Act has been criticised as threatening clear executive authority due to the inclusion of congressional leaders in the line of succession, which some argue is unconstitutional. The Act has been the subject of ongoing dialogue and debate about governance and representation within the US political system.

Are members of Congress eligible to be designated as successors?

The Presidential Succession Act is a federal statute that establishes the presidential line of succession. The Act has been enacted on three occasions: 1792, 1886, and 1947. The 1947 Act was last revised in 2006.

The 1947 Act reinserted the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate into the line of succession, but there has been controversy over whether these individuals are "officers" in the sense intended by Article II of the Constitution, and therefore constitutionally eligible to succeed to the presidency.

Some argue that the term "officer" refers to an "Officer of the United States," which excludes members of Congress. As such, there are concerns about the constitutionality of having members of Congress in the line of succession.

However, others point to the fact that the Speaker and the President Pro Tempore are elected officials, reflecting the belief that the presidency should, whenever possible, "be filled by an elective officer." This belief was held by President Truman, who conveyed this proposal to Congress in 1945, two months after becoming president upon Franklin D. Roosevelt's death.

The 1947 Act has been widely criticized as unconstitutional, and it has been described as a dangerous statute that could deprive the United States of clear executive authority in critical moments.

While the 1947 Act has not been invoked, there have been several occasions where its invocation was a distinct possibility. The likelihood of a person beyond the vice president in the line of succession being called upon to act as president has diminished due to the Twenty-fifth Amendment's provision for filling vice presidential vacancies.

Frequently asked questions