In the fabric of the U.S. Constitution, the 25th Amendment serves a vital purpose: to ensure the continuity and stability of executive leadership when the president is no longer fit to fulfill the duties of office. While rarely invoked in its more serious provisions, it exists as a constitutional safeguard—not a political tool. And yet, in recent years, many Americans have watched with concern as questions mounted about President Joe Biden’s cognitive health. Through it all, former Vice President Kamala Harris remained publicly silent and constitutionally inert.
Understanding the 25th Amendment
Ratified in 1967, the 25th Amendment clarified the procedures for presidential succession and what to do in cases of presidential disability. Section 4 specifically outlines a process whereby the Vice President and most of the Cabinet can declare the President “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” In such a case, the Vice President immediately assumes the role of Acting President.
This provision is not meant to be taken lightly. It is a failsafe for extreme scenarios—stroke, coma, mental incapacity, or any condition that significantly impairs judgment and executive function. It is designed not to embarrass a president, but to protect the country.
The Vice President’s Duty
The Vice President is not merely a ceremonial role or a political partner; under the 25th Amendment, they are a constitutional gatekeeper. The Vice President is uniquely positioned to observe the President’s day-to-day behavior, temperament, and ability to lead. When credible concerns arise about the President’s fitness—especially involving mental health or cognitive decline—the Vice President has a duty to act.
Not to overthrow a leader. Not to stage a coup. But to initiate a process grounded in transparency, law, and national interest.
A Crisis of Observation
During President Biden’s term, a growing chorus of voters, commentators, and even international observers expressed concern over his public appearances—hesitation in speech, confusion, lapses in memory, and moments that raised genuine concern over his mental sharpness. While it’s understandable to defend someone against partisan smears, it is quite another to ignore a sustained pattern that invites bipartisan scrutiny.
And this is where Kamala Harris, as Vice President, failed in her constitutional role.
Harris, who was uniquely positioned to monitor Biden’s capabilities, had every opportunity—and arguably, the obligation—to engage the process outlined in Section 4. If she believed he was fit, she could have said so with conviction, dispelling doubts. If she harbored concerns, she could have initiated private conversations with Cabinet members. But the silence persisted. Not action. Not even dialogue.
Political Loyalty Over Constitutional Integrity?
Critics might argue that Harris was caught in a no-win situation: challenge the President and risk political backlash or remain loyal and preserve party unity. But the Constitution doesn’t bend to political convenience. The vice presidency, particularly under the 25th Amendment, is a constitutional position before it is a political one.
In choosing to remain inactive despite rising concerns, Harris prioritized short-term political calculations over the long-term integrity of executive leadership. If the Amendment means anything, it means that duty must rise above loyalty.
Conclusion
The 25th Amendment exists to protect the Republic from the dangers of executive incapacity. It demands vigilance, courage, and responsibility from those entrusted with the highest offices. Kamala Harris’s inaction in the face of visible and credible concerns about President Biden’s cognitive health was not merely a political decision—it was a dereliction of a constitutional duty.
If the roles were reversed—if a Republican president showed similar signs of decline—one suspects Harris would have been among the first to call for serious review. That double standard is not just troubling. It’s dangerous.
By shunning her constitutional duty to bring forth the question of the 25th amendment regarding President Biden, she failed her duty and the country. Therefore, one can expect that no matter what office she is voted into or appointed to, she can’t be counted on to do the right thing but will bow to pressure regardless of whether it is right or wrong. If we are to make positive advances in this country, we need politicians with integrity and who will step up to do the right thing when the situation arises. She did not do this, and failed the country and the constitution.
Our Constitution only works when its stewards take its duties seriously, especially when it is politically inconvenient. The 25th Amendment is not a relic. It is a warning. And it was ignored when it mattered most.
