Talk:Acting President of the United States

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 December 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

United States: Presidents / Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

David Rice Atcheson

He was acting President for a day, although this is controversial. Shouldn't this be mentioned?Notwisconsin (talk) 17:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, as there is no truth to the idea that Atchison was the nation's acting president for a day. Though a persistent tale, this myth has been thoroughly debunked by scholars.

In 1925 historian George Haynes—an authority on the Senate—dismissed the claims of Atchison’s presidency. The clearest indication that Atchison was not president, he noted, was the fact that Atchison’s existing term as senator and, more importantly, as president pro tempore, had ended at noon on March 4. The position of president pro tempore was, in fact, vacant. Atchison was not elected to the position again until the Senate's special session convened at noon on March 5. Minutes later the president and vice president took their oaths.
"David Rice Atchison: (Not) President for a Day" November 13, 2020. By Senate Historical Office.

It's arguably worth a "see also" entry, though: David Rice Atchison, sometimes claimed to have been acting president for one day. TJRC (talk) 01:36, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Besides, oath or no oath, Taylor & Fillmore became president & vice president at Noon EST, on 4 March 1849 anyway. GoodDay (talk) 07:05, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: You are looking at the situation through a 20th/21st century lens. The fact that the issue (regarding whether Atchison had been the nation's acting president on March 4–5, 1849) arose at all demonstrates that legal and procedural precedents concerning when persons actually cease-to-be and actually become POTUS or VPOTUS were not yet firmly established – wording in the Constitution and in federal law was not so clear-cut. Drdpw (talk) 15:47, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The presidency has never been vacant. Either wise, we'd be reflecting the opposite, every time a re-elected president took his oath of office minutes after Noon EST on inauguration day. Anyways, Atchison wasn't even president pro tempore of the US Senate during the roughly 24 hr window, from when Taylor's & Fillmore's terms began, until when they both took office. GoodDay (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of any 19th century assertions to the contrary, Atchison was never the nation's acting president. therefore, a link to his bio article is not really warranted. Drdpw (talk) 17:00, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. GoodDay (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Table vs. narrative

For the examples of post-25th Amendment invocations of section 3, it seems far more sensible to have a table than a verbal narrative with separate image gallery. Neutrality^talk 03:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a table prior to August 2020. It was deleted after a brief discussion (see it up-page). I'm fine with the current layout, and see no reason to add the table back until a vice president assumes the role of acting president for at least multiple days. Drdpw (talk) 03:44, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need I point out that "we" (by which I mean: not I) should coordinate with Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution#Invocations and considered invocations, eliminating duplication? E Eng 04:58, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to be a little more specific here, as some duplication of material between the two articles is inevitable. Drdpw (talk) 11:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Invocations of 25A Section 3 are a special case of this article's topic, so all the material there on Section 3 should be merged here, leaving just a pointer behind. E Eng 14:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That conversation is off-topic here in this thread, but sounds like a worthwhile subject for a wp:RFC; non-invocations of the amendment and times when it's invocation has been called for would as well. Drdpw (talk) 15:15, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not off topic. When the material here's being reworked, that's a great time to do a related task. Unless someone sees a problem with it, what would we need an RfC for? It's not a big deal. Finally, what do you mean by non-invocations of the amendment and times when it's invocation has been called for would as well? E Eng 17:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about the several instances (listed in that article's Section 4 subsection) where invoking the Amendment was contemplated or suggested but not carried out, and Trump's apparent avoidance of invoking Section 3 in 2019. Drdpw (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That stuff would remain over there, along with a link saying to come here to find all the instances of actual acting-ness. It makes little sense to have that stuff there and here as well. But having said that... looking now at this article, after you discount the stuff which is really about 25A and its invocations there's really very little left -- just a paragraph about 20A plus the subsection Acting_president_of_the_United_States#Before_the_Twenty-fifth_Amendment. So I'm wondering if I have it backwards: perhaps this article should be merged into a combined 25A-and-Acting-President article, with an integrated presentation. E Eng 21:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, a combined presentation (merge/redirect) seems like a good idea to me. As for the table vs. narrative question, it seems bizarre to me to have a WP:PROSELINE style textual summary, plus a random image gallery (both of which are discouraged) rather than a clean, integrated table. Neutrality^talk 21:01, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Neutrality: how about this for a clean, integrated table? It puts the bulleted prose paragraphs into table format without the table looking like a standard "list of" table for people who were sworn into a government position; it also eliminates the random/hanging gallery.

Three vice presidents have served as acting president while the president underwent a medical procedure.

	On July 13, 1985, from 11:28 am to 7:22 pm EDT, George H. W. Bush was acting president while Ronald Reagan underwent colon cancer surgery under anesthesia.<citations>
	On June 29, 2002 from 7:09 am to 9:24 am EDT, and again on July 21, 2007 from 7:16 am to 9:21 am EDT, Dick Cheney was acting president while George W. Bush underwent colonoscopies under sedation.<citations>
	On November 19, 2021, from 10:10 am to 11:35 am EST, Kamala Harris was acting president while Joe Biden underwent a colonoscopy under sedation, becoming the first woman in U.S. history to hold presidential powers and duties.<citations>

Drdpw (talk) 17.05, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

That's not really a table; it's just a bullet list with lines drawn around each entry. I'm thinking something more like this.

Vice presidents have served as acting president on four occasions, in each case while the president was under sedation or anesthesia for medical procedures:

July 13, 1985	11:28 am – 7:22 pm EDT	George H. W. Bush	Ronald Reagan	colon cancer surgery
June 29, 2002	7:09 am – 9:24 am EDT	Dick Cheney	George W. Bush	colonoscopy
July 21, 2007	7:16 am – 9:21 am EDT	Dick Cheney	George W. Bush	colonoscopy
November 19, 2021	10:10 am – 11:35 am EST	Kamala Harris	Joe Biden	colonoscopy

I've left out the images because they're overused in such stuff. This is just a table of facts. I've also omitted re Harris being the first woman etc etc, because that belongs in her article; there are lots of firsts I suppose we could point out but don't.

The more I look at it, the more apparent it is that almost everything here is already in the 25A article, and what little isn't can be quite comfortably integrated there, leaving this page a redirect. E Eng 00:40, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a concise "just the facts" table. Regarding the future of the page itself, lead section material from this article could easily be integrated into the 'Vacancies and succession' section of the POTUS article with the acting president page redirecting there. That is possibly a more apropos redirect target – an issue that can be hashed-out in a move/merge discussion. Drdpw (talk) 02:25, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well there's the 25A article; the POTUS article section you mention; Presidential Succession Act, and United States presidential line of succession. I'm not exactly sure of the right relationship among all those, but I'm sure this article can be dispensed with, and merging it into 25A seems the best way to do that, subject to later adjustment with respect to those other articles. E Eng 02:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article is alright as is. Let's not attempt to fix something, that isn't broken. GoodDay (talk) 07:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, I like your table. Agree that the photos can be dispensed with. Neutrality^talk 18:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A table is probably the best alternative for replacing the current (and discouraged) proseline text, and as there appears to agreement for table formatting and for doing away with the photo gallery, I have gone ahead and put the information, minus the pictures, into table format. Drdpw (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I've been outvoted on this one. Oh well. GoodDay (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Johnson Acting President

The only source for this is a X (formerly Twitter) post. The News story attached contains no mention of Speaker Mike Johnson serving as "Acting President"

This sort of addition to this page is incredibly superfluous. The standard here would require the editors go combing through every prior President's inaguration since January 23, 1933 when the 20th Amendent fixed the end of a President's term to "noon on the 20th Day of January of years in which such terms would have ended had this article not been ratified". The standard would require we put down either the Vice-President (who would have been the acting president for the precious few minutes between noon and President Trump's taking the oath in this case anyway so VP Vance would need to be added to this list if consistentcy is a concern) or the Speaker of the House of Representitives, when the President-elect had yet to take the oath in the 30 seconds following 12:00 EST. ;

Additionally, there is no case law that outlines every detail of who is in office and when, nor that during the inagural ceremony when the oath of office is being adminstered, a failure to take the oath at, or before "noon" constitutes a failure to qualify the President-elect triggering the devolution clause. The Nuclear codes change hands at noon. Consiquently, I've removed this line as a usless bit of trivia politico's might argue over in the same way comic book fanatics might argue of which Silver Surfer is the "real" Silver Surfer. ReminderCG56 (talk) 09:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Acting Presidents in the lede

I believe having the VP's who acted as president on the LEDE would be beneficial, not everyone wants to go through the entire article on an off chance it is actually listed, when I do research projects, I look for that kind of key info in the main first paragraphs, it is easier for the user to read and find, we could atleast have a hyperlink that directs users to the bottom of the article to see the table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwoaiden (talk • contribs) 03:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. Although I was one of the editors who tweaked and added to this after it had been added to the lede, I'm persuaded that Drdpw was correct in deleting the detailed listing.

The lede is intended to be a "concise overview", and I think "concise" is the byword here. The article is about 1500 words already; not every fact in the text can be recapitulated in the lede, nor should it be.

The lede, which notes that there have been three VPs who acted as AP so far, is the right level of detail. Any seriously interested reader who wanted detail would look at the table of contents, see the "History" headline, and go to that section to get the detail -- where it resides. TJRC (talk) 22:05, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]