9th Amendment Project: Official Advocacy Statement
Document ID: 9AP-POLICY-2026-007
Subject: Opposition to the Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office Act
Jurisdiction: The Sovereignty of the Voter & Retained Political Rights
The 9th Amendment Project (9AP) has formally classified the Commission on The 9th Amendment Project (9AP) has formally classified the Commission on Presidential Capacity Act, introduced by Representative Jamie Raskin on April 14, 2026, as a foundational threat to the continuity of constitutional government. This legislation seeks to establish a permanent, 17-member “body” empowered to medicalize political opposition and bypass the standard hurdles of impeachment to remove a sitting President. By shifting the power of removal from the people’s representatives to a panel of unelected “experts,” this bill effects a jurisdictional seizure of the executive office.
The 9th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution mandates that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Central to these retained rights is the Sovereignty of the Voter—the inherent authority of the people to choose their Chief Executive without that choice being pathologized or vetoed by a clinical panel.
- U.S. Supreme Court Precedent (Political Sovereignty): In Powell v. McCormack (1969), the Court held that the people should choose whom they please to govern them, and that this choice cannot be undermined by adding qualifications or removal mechanisms not found in the Constitution. The 9AP asserts that “mental capacity” as defined by an unelected commission constitutes a shadowy, unconstitutional qualification for office.
- The 25th Amendment Conflict: While Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows Congress to appoint a “body” to assist the Vice President, it was intended as a safeguard for total physical or mental incapacitation (e.g., a coma). The Raskin bill attempts to transform this “emergency brake” into a “permanent steering wheel,” violating the original intent of the amendment.
- Federal Appellate Precedent: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly affirmed that the structure of the separation of powers is designed to protect individual liberty (Ass’n of Am. R.Rs. v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp.). Creating a permanent commission that bridges the Legislative and Executive branches for the purpose of removal is a structural violation of that liberty.
The 9AP Analysis: Legal and Judicial Overreach
The Raskin bill attempts to create a “Professional Veto” over the results of a national election. This is a tactical maneuver to allow the Administrative State to remove a leader who refuses to adhere to the “Permanent Washington” consensus.
- Disparagement of the Minority: In United States v. Classic (1941), the Supreme Court recognized that the right to vote includes the right to have that vote be effective. If 17 un-elected individuals can “diagnose” an elected President out of office, the effectiveness of the vote for millions of citizens is disparaged.
- The “General Welfare” Fallacy: Proponents argue that the commission is necessary for the “general welfare” and national security. However, as noted in the 10th Amendment, powers not delegated to the United States are reserved to the people. The power to “veto” a President based on medical opinion was never delegated to Congress.
The 9AP Mandate: A Call to Action
The 9th Amendment Project stands in defense of the Sovereign Voter. The right to judge the fitness of a President belongs to the people at the ballot box every four years, not to a committee of physicians holding a clipboards. The state possesses no authority to pathologize the people’s choice.
We demand the immediate rejection of the Commission on Presidential Capacity Act. We call on all citizens to recognize this for what it is: a legislative bypass of the American voter.
“Political fitness is a judgment of the people, not a diagnosis of the state. Sovereignty is a right we retained, and it is a right we will defend.” — 9th Amendment Project Charter
Leave a Reply