American officials are discussing the possibility of postponing November’s presidential election, for the first time in United States history, in the event of a devastating terrorist attack, it emerged on Monday.
A spokesperson for the Homeland Security Department said the possibility of a postponement in extreme circumstances is being contemplated, four days after the department warned that al-Qaeda is plotting a large-scale attack aimed at disrupting the November 2 election.
However, the Justice Department, whose office of legal counsel would normally consider such issues, said it has not been consulted.
”No letter has been sent and no request has been received,” a spokesperson said on Monday.
A primary election in New York scheduled for September 11 2001 was quickly postponed by the state’s election board after hijacked planes hit the World Trade Centre that day.
However, the US election assistance commission noted that ”the federal government has no agency that has the statutory authority to cancel and reschedule a federal election”, according to a letter to Tom Ridge, the Homeland Security Secretary, published by Newsweek magazine.
Some legal experts argued that bestowing that power on an official or body would certainly require a constitutional amendment. However, Todd Peterson, a law professor at George Washington University, said that Congress already has that power.
”My sense is that it wouldn’t need a constitutional amendment,” he said. ”Congress has pretty clear constitutional authority to determine the timing both of the presidential and congressional elections.”
In the middle of a bitter and close presidential race, and after the legal wrangling that ultimately led to President George Bush’s disputed victory in 2000, the mere mention of the possibility of a postponement has been enough to spark controversy.
”I don’t think there’s an argument that can be made, for the first time in our history, to delay an election,” said Dianne Feinstein of California, a Democratic member of the Senate intelligence committee. ”We hold elections in the middle of war, in the middle of earthquakes, in the middle of whatever it takes.”
However, some observers argued that it is part of the Homeland Security Department’s job to consider ways of ensuring the continuity of the government after an attack.
Juliette Kayyem, an expert on terrorism and the law at Harvard University, said: ”It’s very consistent with the continuity-of-government plan. But my legal sense is that it would not be easy to postpone a federal election.”
Kayyem believes only a catastrophic attack, such as a nuclear assault, on Washington itself will justify a nationwide postponement.
Meanwhile, Bush on Monday defended his decision to go to war in Iraq, saying Saddam Hussein had posed a serious threat to the US, despite a Senate report last week finding that prewar intelligence suggesting Iraq had weapons of mass destruction had been wrong.
He said: ”We removed a declared enemy of America who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder.” — Guardian Unlimited Â