Brian Kalt

Professor of Law & Harold Norris Faculty Scholar Michigan State University

  • East Lansing MI

Expert in constitutional law of the presidency, presidential pardons, impeachment, succession and the 25th Amendment.

Contact

Michigan State University

View more experts managed by Michigan State University

View all Experts

Spotlight

1 min

Just the facts, please

Fact-checking might be a full-time job this election cycle as pundits, people on social media, news panels and even presidential candidates are weighing in on topics perhaps before getting all the details or double-checking for the truth. With the recent decision by President Biden to opt off the ballot for this November's election it ignited a firestorm of opinions on whether it was legal or not. It's why places like PolitiFact reached out to Michigan State University's Brian Kalt to get 'the fact's on just what was legal or not. He added however, the the Supreme Court has the final say if it is contested. Brian Kalt, a Michigan State University law professor, said he couldn’t imagine the Supreme Court would prohibit Democrats from replacing Biden as their presidential nominee. "But who can say?" he added. "The Supreme Court has a habit of exceeding the bounds of my imagination." And, if you are a reporter covering politics, the campaigns and the election this November, then let our experts help with your questions and ensure your coverage is accurate. Brian Kalt is a Professor of Law and a Harold Norris Faculty Scholar at Michigan State University. He is an expert in constitutional law of the presidency, and he’s available to speak with media regarding how the Constitution and laws play a role in elections. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.

Brian Kalt

2 min

Schumer has called for Trump to be removed via the 25th amendment, but how would that work? Michigan State’s Brian Kalt, leading constitutional law expert, is available to assist in coverage

After a speech by President Donald Trump that inspired a hoard of protestors to storm the Capitol buildings in Washington – there are growing concerns of what the outgoing President might do next. As well, there’s also growing talk about how to prevent what could be another national or even international incident. One such measure that’s been a talking point for journalists, politicians and pundits since Wednesday, and recently has been called-for by Senator Chuck Schumer, is removing the president from office by invoking the 25th Amendment. It’s a topic that Michigan State University’s constitutional expert Brian Kalt knows well. "Section 4 is designed primarily to work against presidents who cannot do anything, not against presidents who are all too able to do bad things—the latter is fodder for the impeachment process," Kalt explains. "So might Section 4 be a realistic option? Perhaps, if the situation in Washington, DC, spirals further out of control between now and January 20. But Section 4 sets that bar high." There’s a lot to know about this topic, especially given the extreme circumstances in which it is used. And, if you are a reporter covering politics and this potential situation, then let our experts help with your questions and ensure your coverage is accurate. Brian Kalt is a Professor of Law and a Harold Norris Faculty Scholar at Michigan State University. He is an expert in constitutional law of the presidency, and he’s available to speak with media regarding how the Constitution and laws play a role in elections. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.

Brian Kalt

2 min

Delaying the election? For those who don’t know – the Constitution trumps any delay when it comes to a change of power in January

Delaying the election?  For those who don’t know – the Constitution trumps any delay when it comes to a change of power in January   It was taking twitter by storm. President Donald Trump was raging against the idea of mail-in ballots and even alluded in one tweet that perhaps the November 03, 2020 election sate needs to be delayed.   Now delays are possible, and history has shown that results don’t always come clearly on election night. However, the experts from Michigan State University want to remind everyone that it’s the Constitution that ultimately decides when there’s a change of power in Washington.   “There are a couple of important legal points to remember about this,” says Brian Kalt, professor of law at Michigan State University.  “First, the day for federal elections and for the meeting of the Electoral College is set by law so only Congress has the authority to reset it, not the President or anyone else.” And if there is no election this November, or if there are significant delays, Kalt also wants people to know, it does not mean an extension of Trump’s presidency. “Second, regardless of when the election is held, the 20th Amendment specifies that the President’s term (as well as the Vice President’s) ends at noon on January 20. If there is no election to replace the President, the line of succession statute kicks in. With no President-Elect or Vice President-Elect to qualify, the Speaker of the House would become Acting President until an election could be held. Of course, if there is no presidential election there would presumably be no congressional elections either. In that case, there would be no House: the 20th Amendment ends congressional terms on January 3. With no House—and thus no Speaker—the next in line would be the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Since only about a third of senators see their terms expire in each cycle, the Senate is a continuing body. The remaining senators would have a quorum and would select a new President Pro Tempore.” This leaves the fate of the presidency and the keys to the White House in the hands of just a few powerful people in Washington. And the outcome of how they would choose is anyone’s guess.   And , if you are a reporter covering politics and this potential situation, then let our experts help with your questions and ensure your coverage is accurate. Brian Kalt is a Professor of Law and a Harold Norris Faculty Scholar at Michigan State University. He is an expert in constitutional law of the presidency, and he’s available to speak with media regarding how the Constitution and laws play a role in elections. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.

Brian Kalt
Show More +

Biography

Before coming to MSU College of Law in 2000, Brian Kalt was an associate at the Washington, D.C., office of Sidley Austin. He earned his juris doctor from Yale Law School, where he was an editor on the Yale Law Journal. After law school, he served as a law clerk for the Honorable Danny J. Boggs, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Professor Kalt's research focuses on structural constitutional law and juries. At MSU Law, Kalt teaches Tort and Administrative law.

Industry Expertise

Writing and Editing
Education/Learning
Research
Public Policy
International Affairs
Program Development

Areas of Expertise

Structural Constitutional Law
Administrative Law
Juries
The Bill of Rights
Tort Reform

Accomplishments

Harold Norris Faculty Scholar

Awarded by Michigan State University

Crystal Apple Award

2011-01-01

Awarded by MSU College of Education

Education

Yale Law School

J.D.

1997

University of Michigan

A.B., with Highest Distinction

1994

Affiliations

  • State Bar of Michigan
  • United States Courts of Appeals: District of Columbia Circuit; Sixth Circuit
  • Federalist Society
  • Life Member, Sixth Circuit Judicial Conference

News

Fact-check: Is replacing Joe Biden on the ticket ‘unlawful’? Election law experts say it’s not

Politifact  

2024-07-22

Brian Kalt, a Michigan State University law professor, said he couldn’t imagine the Supreme Court would prohibit Democrats from replacing Biden as their presidential nominee. "But who can say?" he added. "The Supreme Court has a habit of exceeding the bounds of my imagination."

View More

Explainer: Trump's acts as president are 'fair game' for criminal charges

Reuters  online

2021-02-16

Here's an explanation of how Trump's leaving office affects his criminal and civil exposure. Can Trump be prosecuted for acts he engaged in as president? Yes. Now that Trump has left office, any misconduct he engaged in as president is “fair game” for criminal charges, said Brian Kalt, a constitutional law professor at Michigan State University. Trump enjoyed more protection from prosecution while he was president because the U.S. Justice Department has concluded it would be unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. But there is no federal prohibition on charging a former president for acts committed while in office. “The immunity argument is about the timing of the trial; it is generally accepted that ex-presidents can be prosecuted for crimes committed in office,” Kalt said.

View More

Impeachment trial: Democrat says Trump lawyers misrepresented scholar's argument

The New York Times  online

2021-02-09

Most legal scholars, including some leading conservatives, agree that a former president can be tried by the Senate even after leaving office — a point Democrats seized upon during their remarks. Representative Joe Neguse of Colorado noted that Brian Kalt, a legal scholar cited repeatedly by Mr. Trump's lawyers, publicly disputed their portrayal of his law journal article on the topic of trying former officials. “They misrepresent what I wrote quite badly,” tweeted Mr. Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University. “My article presented all of the evidence I found on both sides, so there were lots for them to use fairly. They didn't have to be disingenuous and misleading like this.” Mr. Trump's lawyers cited Mr. Kalt's article 15 times in their impeachment defense brief.

View More

Show All +

Journal Articles

Unconstitutional but entrenched: Putting UOCAVA and voting rights for permanent expatriates on a sound constitutional footing

Brooklyn Law Review

2016

Eligible voters who have left the United States permanently have the right to vote in federal elections as though they still live at their last stateside address. They need not be residents of their former states, be eligible to vote in state and local elections, or pay any state or local taxes. Federal law—the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA)—forces states to let these former residents vote for President, the Senate, and the House this way. There are several constitutional problems with all of this...

View more

Don't kill the candidate: Remedying Congress's failure to use Section 4 of the Twentieth Amendment

Harvard Journal on Legislation

2016

When no presidential candidate wins a majority in the electoral college, the House of Representatives holds a “contingent election” between the top three candidates. Unfortunately, if one of those three candidates should die there is no way to provide a substitute, so the dead candidate’s supporters and party would be disenfranchised.

View more

The application of the disqualification clause to congress: A response to Benjamin Cassady, 'you've got your crook, I've got mine': Why the disqualification clause doesn't (always) disqualify

Quinnipiac Law Review

2014

This article is a response to Benjamin Cassady’s recent article, “You’ve Got Your Crook, I’ve Got Mine”: Why the Disqualification Clause Doesn’t (Always) Disqualify. It agrees with Your Crook that disqualification does not apply to election to the House or Senate, and that voters should have as free a hand as the Constitution will allow to elect representatives and senators that others in Congress might find scurrilous.

View more

Show All +
Powered by