Talk:United States presidential line of succession

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023

Please change Speaker of the house from Kevin McCarthy To Patrick Henry Zackkoltz (talk) 15:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

This edit is supported by https://usa.gov/presidential-succession

which indicates speaker of the house as 2nd in the line and as stated by the above website and Pamela N at USA.gov Zackkoltz (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Not done -- Neither Patrick Henry nor Patrick McHenry is currently Speaker of the House. McHenry is "acting Speaker", which means he is not the actual speaker and thus not in line for presidential succession. Once the new Speaker is chosen, then that person will be placed in the proper position. (McCarthy had already been removed prior to this request.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Patrick Henry, having been dead consistently since 1799, is ineligible for the presidency-- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

lolz - wolf 19:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

He's been dead consistently? I thought he got up and walked around Virginia for a bit once. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

The man said "Give me liberty, or give me death!"; both did not seem to be an option to him. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 23:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Very true. Though dead or undead, maybe he would appreciate a spot in the gubernatorial line of succession. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

N Kevin McCarthy is no longer listed as speaker of the House. And, Patrick McHenry is not speaker of the House, thus he will not be listed as a potential presidential successor. Drdpw (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I spoke to three separate people at USA.gov who confirmed that Patrick McHenry is in the presidential line of succession. Unless the Government would lie about that? I have the chat logs and names as well as phone numbers of who I talked too. Zackkoltz (talk) 16:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Absent a statement to that effect published by a reliable secondary source, saying that he is in the presidential line of succession would be original research. Drdpw (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

• Not lying, just mistaken. See these secondary sources for example: businessinsider.com; king5.com; foxnews.com. Drdpw (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

  See also [1] Nil Einne (talk) 11:24, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Succession former two-time presidents

See Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution#Interaction with the Twenty-second Amendment.

That says: "The Twelfth Amendment explicitly states the constitutional requirements as provided for the president also apply to being vice president and the Twenty-second Amendment bars a two-term president from being elected to a third term, but it is unexplicit whether these amendments together bar any two-term president from later serving as vice president as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession." (my emphasis)

I quickly scanned this article but could not find where or if this aspect is discussed. If it isn't, I think it should.

Could a twice-President (say Obama or Bush) become Speaker of the House (or, say, Secretary of Veterans Affairs for that matter) and through circumstances serve as president even though he clearly is ineligible for being elected to the presidency?

(Obviously I don't expect a clear answer. I'm suggesting this aspect be discussed if not already)

CapnZapp (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

If this conundrum is discussed in WP:RS, feel free to add any statements that can be supported by such RS. Without such RS support, this should not be added to WP because that would constitute WP:OR. YBG (talk) 04:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

A suggestion

I believe that the table "Presidential succession by vice presidents" could be improved by adding a color bar for the (ex-)President's party. (As was added to the table of next-in-lines.) It would make it easier to spot the times when a party switch occurred.WHPratt (talk) 14:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

under the 1947 succession act

Wouldn't there have been two occasions here when there was not a Speaker in between the expiration of the old Congress and the election of the new one? This would be for at least a few hours on January 3, 1949 and from January 3-4, 1965. I think that the president pro tempore is generally designated by unanimous consent immediately upon the Senate convening, while the Speaker is subject to a full election process which can take at least an hour or two, so likely in 1949 Secretary of State Marshall might have been first in line for a couple of minutes, then President pro tempore McKellar for an hour or two.

In 1965, the new Congress didn't convene for a day after the old one ran out, so Secretary of State Rusk was definitely first in line for a day since neither Speaker McCormack nor President pro tem Hayden can have been re-elected to those roles until Cognress reconvened. john k (talk) 03:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)