“The [Doomsday] Clock Ticks”: The Twenty-Fifth Amendment on the Precipice traces the amendment through the present. As soon as Donald Trump was sworn in as the forty-fifth president, questions of unfitness and calls to remove the president swirled through mainstream media. Talk of invoking Section 4 of the amendment occurred at the highest levels of government. Due to concerns about mental acuity, physical frailty, and age, such calls continued during Joseph Biden’s presidency. The resurgence of nuclear anxiety in politics and culture mirrored building tensions across the world. The framers of the amendment had assumed that decision-makers shared a common mindset that placed allegiance to the country above personal gain. While some have acted on behalf of the common good, promising to block the “unlawful” use of nuclear weapons, the persistent number of misunderstandings around the intent and mechanics of the amendment along with the prioritization of the retention of power suggest that the pattern of concern discussed in Chapter 5 will continue.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

“The [Doomsday] Clock Ticks”: The Twenty-Fifth Amendment on the Precipice

  • Rebecca C. Lubot

摘要

“The [Doomsday] Clock Ticks”: The Twenty-Fifth Amendment on the Precipice traces the amendment through the present. As soon as Donald Trump was sworn in as the forty-fifth president, questions of unfitness and calls to remove the president swirled through mainstream media. Talk of invoking Section 4 of the amendment occurred at the highest levels of government. Due to concerns about mental acuity, physical frailty, and age, such calls continued during Joseph Biden’s presidency. The resurgence of nuclear anxiety in politics and culture mirrored building tensions across the world. The framers of the amendment had assumed that decision-makers shared a common mindset that placed allegiance to the country above personal gain. While some have acted on behalf of the common good, promising to block the “unlawful” use of nuclear weapons, the persistent number of misunderstandings around the intent and mechanics of the amendment along with the prioritization of the retention of power suggest that the pattern of concern discussed in Chapter 5 will continue.