Article II gives the President the power to "fill all Vacancies" when the Senate is in 
recess.  I am suggesting that this be read as referring to vacancies in the Executive 
Branch, period.  Thus no judicial recess appointments.  Others believe that "all" 
means "ALL."  Fair enough, but now consider a "vacancy" in the office of the Vice 
presidency (a not unknown phenomenon).  Why doesn't the President, even prior to the 
25th amendment, simply get to fill "that vacancy"?  I presume that the answer lies in 
the fact that the Senate plays no role in choosing vice presidents (prior to the 25th 
amendment).  But now let's factor in the 25th Amendment, in which both the House and 
Senate have a role.

Assume that something happens to the vice president    (either Gore or Cheney:  I 
don't intend to make a partisan point).   I believe, with Akhil Amar, that the 
Succession in Office Act is unconstitutional; perhaps more to the point, I agree with 
Norman Ornstein that it is a monstrous stupidity in its potential mischief for the 
smooth operation of the US government.  In any case, assume that the demise of the VP 
happens just after Congress has adjourned.  The President could (absolutely sensibly) 
believe that the US can't afford to be without a VP until Congress returns to 
Washington and revs up the confirmation machinery, not least because, say, the Speaker 
of the House, who would unconstitutionally succeed to the White House if something 
happened to the President, is also a member of the opposite party (Gingrich, Tip 
O'Neill during the Reagan era) or has no ascertainable qualities for which we look to 
in a Chief Executive (John MacCormack, Dennis Hastert, for starters).  S!
 o why doesn't the "literalist" Article II argument give the President the right to 
make a recess appointment for VP.  (To be sure, Section II of the 25th Amendment 
provides that the President shall nominate and both houses shall confirm the new vice 
president, but how does this *really* differ from the process by which people are 
supposed to become Article III judges?).

sandy

sandy

Reply via email to