With two episodes remaining in the season, things are coming to a head on 24 . Following the detonation of a nuclear bomb on American soil, the US is about to unleash a devastating attack on "three middle eastern countries" (never named, for obvious reasons). The three middle eastern countries are targeted based on an audio recording of officials from the three countries discussing the nuclear attack with a known terrorist. Our hero, counterterrorism agent Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland), has found the man who forged the audio recording (so cleverly that the FBI's experts were fooled). Now he must bring that man in within an hour or so before the tragically misdirected US attack takes place and war breaks out. Meanwhile, deposed President David Palmer ...
Wait a minute. Deposed president? Yes, in last week's episode, Palmer's vice president and cabinet removed him from office pursuant to the 25th Amendment, on the ground that he was no longer fit to exercise his authority as president. The evidence of his unfitness: principally, his unwillingness to order the military strike, based on Bauer's assurance that--experts' analysis to the contrary notwithstanding--the audio recording was a fake.

On reading the amendment, it's virtually impossible to see how it could properly be invoked in a situation like the 24 storyline. By its terms, the amendment seems to contemplate a situation like that of Woodrow Wilson following his stroke: a president who, because of physical or mental illness or infirmity, is unable to meet the demands and obligations of the executive office. It's virtually inconceivable that it could be invoked over what is, in essence, a policy dispute--even if, as the generals in the show insist, any delay would ultimately cost the lives of 20,000 American soldiers.

Part of me, I know, is just fighting the hypothetical; I should simply climb aboard and enjoy the ride. The show, after all, is rife with implausibilities--to take the most obvious example, within the last 14 hours Jack Bauer has survived a plane crash (in which a metal beam impaled his leg) and been tortured literally to death (a doctor was able to restart his heart after a minute or two), and yet here he is, running around, fully alert and seemingly at full strength, only a few hours later. Why should I focus on the constitutional issue?

Still, the constitutional implausibility bothered me last week and continued to nag at me last night. What Iowa law professor Tung Yin found intriguing last week, I find at least a bit disturbing. There's enough misunderstanding among the public of how our fundamental charter operates as it is. The only way to salvage the legal implausibility is with another implausibility: a revelation that the vice president and a substantial portion of the cabinet were in on the bomb plot. Fans of 24: you do understand that this isn't how the Constitution works, right?