Hacker News Reader

Comment by Hongwei | Hacker News Reader

Anyone know who his VP pick will be? I know this won't happen but it'd be funny if he picked Obama.

Iirc only people who would be eligible for the presidency can be elected as VP, which would disqualify Obama. This is the same reason Bernie couldn't have chosen AOC as his running mate

There is no such restriction. Article II never specified any limit on how long someone could serve.

The 22nd Amendment limits only who can be elected to the office of President. Since a VP becomes President through devolution, not election, it doesn't limit who may serve as VP.

Isn't there a 10 year limit as well though? Especially for this case where someone serves as president without being elected?

That being said, I'm not sure either if the restriction in the parent exists.

Edit: a reference I found afterwards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_of_office#Federal

Not exactly. The 22nd Amendment would prohibit the second election of someone who had served for more than two years without having been elected.

For example, if Gerald Ford had been elected president after he finished Nixon's term, he would be ineligible to be elected a second time, since he initially served for a little over two years and five months.

That doesn't change the fact that the 22nd Amendment only restricts the election of a president. If someone has already served in the office for ten years, they could still be the VP who upon whom the presidency devolves, because there is no constitutional restriction on such eligibility.

> The 22nd Amendment limits only who can be elected to the office of President. Since a VP becomes President through devolution, not election, it doesn't limit who may serve as VP.

So it would be constitutional to give Obama a third term through a Putin-esque sham where Biden runs at the top of the ticket then immediately resigns after taking office?

Many would argue so.

There are things everyone agrees about, but for everything else, constitutionality isn't really established until it's been enacted and then ruled on by the Supreme Court.

Would the Supreme Court allow such a move to stand? It's possible, especially without clear evidence that the campaign and resignation was planned and executed specifically to circumvent the 22nd Amendment.

Why is AOC not eligible for presidency?

you have to be 35.

That requirement should have been removed around Y2K. Before that it made sense because at 35 you'd still not know much about the world.

You say that as if the problem of not knowing much about the world had been solved. And I say that as someone under 35.

They're different reasons.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 discusses who "shall be eligible to the Office of President". AOC doesn't meet the requirement of being 35 years old, which means she's not eligible in the first place.

But the 22nd Amendment refers to who "shall be elected to the office of the President". That's not the same thing.

Sorry to follow up with a second comment; it's too late to edit my original.

Yes, Michelle Obama.

I think he already committed to having a woman VP, so extra unlikely.

There's another Obama, you know.

[Edit: Though I don't think that's what Hongwei meant...]

I feel like it'll probably be Kamala

Seems like he should pick someone who will help him nab a swing state, also seems weird to me after that busing dust-up.

Kamala Harris (take it to the bank!)

Obviously nobody knows that.

Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Gretchen Whitmer, or Tammy Baldwin seem like reasonable guesses.

I don't think he would pick Elizabeth Warren. She's a powerful ally in the Senate.

Her seat may be in danger, though.

Is that right? Didn't know, TIL. Don't really follow politics all that closely, although I am disappointed that Bernie didn't make it through these primaries.

He did say he'd pick a woman of color.

Warren would have to re-assert her native American ancestry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com