Professor John Feerick was interviewed by Law.com following the announcement that he would receive the American Bar Association Medal, the bar’s highest honor, for his work helping draft the 25th Amendment and for his many other contributions to the law.
Congratulations on the ABA Medal. What was your reaction when you learned of that decision?
I was humbled, astonished and overwhelmed by it. I was asked to come to a meeting with [ABA President] Linda Klein and the dean of our law school. I thought it had something to do with helping out with the annual meeting this summer. Instead, it was set up to let me know I had been selected for this honor. I really couldn’t get my hands around it. I certainly did not feel worthy of it.
Let’s talk about the 25th Amendment. It’s 50 years old this year and it’s getting a lot of buzz right now. How did you get involved in drafting it?
When I graduated from law school in 1961, I had read a brief article on the problem of presidential inability. Almost concurrently with that, a college classmate said he had a folder of material on the subject from the Eisenhower administration. Eisenhower had several disabilities. He gave me that folder.
I was curious why the problem had not been solved. I decided to look into the problem, and I became totally obsessed and absorbed by it—so much so that when I was dating my wife the one subject I’d keep talking about was how to handle the disability of a president. I spent two-and-a-half years studying the problem, looking at state government and foreign government constitutions to see how they handle succession. I put it all together in a law review article, when I was an associate at a law firm.
How did it go from a law review article to a constitutional amendment?
The opportunity to participate came in part because the weekend after the assassination of [Kennedy] my article was the focus of a New York Times editorial page article.
I was then invited by the American Bar Association to join 11 other people in a conference on presidential succession. Before I knew it, I had a lot of requests to write about it, to chair the Young Lawyers Division of the ABA, to promote the approval of the amendment in Congress and ratification by the states. I was drawn on by members of Congress and committee staff to assist with the drafting of an amendment on the subject.
Would the amendment have gone forward had Kennedy not been assassinated?
It’s hard to say. The assassination of President Kennedy was so dramatic and so tragic that there was a lot of attention given to inability. Would there have been a constitutional amendment had that not happened? I don’t know, but that clearly propelled the movement to change the Constitution and deal with these subjects. In the final analysis, if I had to speculate, it probably wouldn’t have happened.
…
Do you have any take on the likelihood of the amendment coming into play during the Trump presidency?
That’s not a subject that I feel qualified to deal with, really. I have a lot of history I can provide on the amendment, but I don’t presume to put myself in the position of vice president or the cabinet, or anyone who else might be faced with a question about the amendment. I don’t rush to judgment on things like that.
…
When you look back on your legal career, of what are you most proud?
I’m certainly very proud to have been involved in the crafting of an amendment that’s in the United States Constitution. I think that’s something very special. But I’ve always made it a part of my life to serve others, and to be there for lawyers in transition, law students who are seeking employment, and senior lawyers who are trying to cope with change in their life. When I put all that quiet activity together, that’s probably the most important thing my life stands for.
