What’s Taking So Long? On the Gap Between Election Day and the Inauguration

By Judith E. Schaeffer, Vice President, Constitutional Accountability Center

Is it just me, or does Election Day — November 4, 2008 — feel like a geologic era ago? (And, as I write this, we are still four days away from the Inauguration.) Well, imagine what the period between Election Day and Inauguration Day must have felt like before the ratification of the 20th Amendment in 1933. Back then, the new President was not sworn in until March 4, four months after Election Day. That makes our modern transition period seem like, well, just a brief moment in time.

In the early days of our country, it made sense to give the new administration several months in which to take office. Election returns could hardly be gathered with the speed in which they are now (even if recounts might seem to take an eternity), and travel by horse and buggy took quite a bit longer as well. But by the 20th Century, there was no reason to retain the four-month gap, and so Congress proposed, and the States duly ratified, the 20th Amendment, which fixed the start of a President’s term at noon on January 20th. (The Amendment also shortened the period of time in which Representatives and Senators would serve as “lame ducks” by mandating that the Congress convene in January.)

Some question, however, whether even the shorter interval between Election Day and Inauguration Day created by the 20th Amendment is still too long. Now, for example, with our country in a deep financial crisis, with the Middle East in renewed turmoil, and with the approval ratings of our current President at record lows, would our country have been better off if the President elected in early November could have taken office sooner than January 20th? Given the important decisions that must be made before a new administration can effectively govern, including the selection, vetting, and nomination of members of the Cabinet, is it even practical to think that there could be a shorter transition time?

These very questions are being debated between Constitutional scholars Sandy Levinson and Jack Balkin (as well as numerous commenters) at Balkinizaton. We encourage you to take a look at their discussion, posted here, here, here, here, and here. Whatever you may think of a two-month transition, at least we can thank the 20th Amendment that it’s not twice as long.

More from

Rule of Law
September 24, 2024

RELEASE: Senate Judiciary Committee Rightly Focuses on the Harms of Trump v. United States and Grapples with Damage Mitigation

WASHINGTON, DC – As the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, ‘When the President Does It, that...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
September 23, 2024

Sign On Letter: 75 Organizations Call to Overturn Supreme Court Presidential Immunity Ruling

September 23, 2024 The Honorable Richard Durbin, Chairman Ranking Member Lindsay Graham Honorable Members, Committee...
Voting Rights and Democracy
September 20, 2024

“Will the Supreme Court Revive the Dangerous Fringe Election Theory It Just Rejected?”

Election Law Blog
Anna Jessurun in Slate: As several scholars predicted, ISLT proponents have now seized on the language in Moore to...
Voting Rights and Democracy
September 19, 2024

Will the Supreme Court Revive the Dangerous Fringe Election Theory It Just Rejected?

Slate
From troubling election denialism to rampant misinformation about voter fraud, there are already multiple respects...
By: Anna Jessurun
Rule of Law
September 12, 2024

September 2024 Newsletter: CAC Fights in the Lower Courts to Support Voting Rights and the Legality of Progressive Policies

Immigration and Citizenship
September 10, 2024

Trump, Vance y estos congresistas latinos quieren acabar con la ciudadanía por nacimiento. ¿Pueden hacerlo?

Telemundo
Quien nace en territorio estadounidense es considerado ciudadano por la Constitución desde hace 156 años....