For those that is interested...find the info on Google (many of them).
Constitutional Law Professor Ken Katkin made a statement that is worth debating on the status of President the past week.
Quote:
|
No, the oath is *not* legally meaningless, even if it is a ritual. Art. II Sec 1. Cl. 8 of the US Const. clearly states that “Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following oath. . . ”
|
This person said much more.
I'm a bit confused, but somehow, Rice was the President for a short time. Biden was also the President for a short time.
So, yeah, Obama did not qualify, since the oath was a complete failure, no matter how minor it was. (I still don't think Obama qualify for other reasons...)
Recap...
For the few minutes past noon, Rice was technically the President.
Pelosi never did resign her seat in Congress, so technically she did not qualify. That brings Rice as President.
Bush's time expired at noon. Rice was the Acting President.
As soon Biden completed his oath on Vice President, he soon became the Acting President for a short time, since Obama did not tehnically qualify on the oath issue.
Aye, confusing, I know.
Prue, care to clarify?
