How ‘Unraveled’ Does Trump Have to Be? Presidential Disability and the 25th Amendment. - Lawfare

There's a lot of loose talk about the 25th Amendment as a mechanism for removing Trump from office.  Not so fast...

Amendment XXV - Constitution of he United States of America

SEC. 2. If the President shall declare in writing that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
SEC. 3. If the President does not so declare, the Vice President, if satisfied of the President’s inability, and upon approval in writing of a majority of the heads of executive departments who are members of the President’s Cabinet, shall discharge the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
SEC. 4. Whenever the president declares in writing that his inability is terminated, the President shall forthwith discharge the powers and duties of his office.

How ‘Unraveled’ Does Trump Have to Be? Presidential Disability and the 25th Amendment. - Lawfare
by Matthew Kahn//Brookings Institution

Vanity Fair recently reported that White House sources believe the president is “unraveling.” As politicos across a widening swath of the ideological spectrum grow concerned with the president’s conduct, temperament and basic competence, references to the 25th Amendment have proliferated. It even showed up in the Vanity Fair piece: Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon told Trump that the biggest threat to his presidency wasn’t impeachment but the 25th Amendment. Trump reportedly replied, “What’s that?”

It’s a good question.

***

In September, Jane Chong observed two myths about impeachment: that the process is purely political, and that the House cannot begin considering it without clear evidence of criminality. One can say something similar about the 25th Amendment. The process is not purely political, though the final mechanism is a political process. And there’s no particular threshold that needs to be reached before the relevant body—in this case the Cabinet—starts thinking about it. That said, objective criteria like medical considerations should be at the fore. (A 1983 Miller Center commission co-chaired by Sen. Birch Bayh and Attorney General Brownell endorses the view that science should be central to the judgment.) And a Cabinet should always be vigilant about signs of presidential disability; it is the constitutional duty of Cabinet officers.

Each citizen should draw his or her own conclusion about presidential disability. But make no mistake: Invoking Section 4 would have a dramatic and potentially dangerous effect on our politics. Even if meticulously executed, the process is fraught with political pitfalls that could further undermine divisions among the public and legitimacy in U.S. institutions.

So although Bannon might have been right that the 25th Amendment could pose a real threat to the Trump presidency, it should give the president's political opponents little, if any, solace.