figure_caption
Figure 1.1 — The Republic Assumed Visibility. A two-era comparison showing early-republic visibility versus modern managed opacity.
Figure 2.1 — The Presidential Secrecy Timeline. Selected episodes of presidential-health opacity; the evidence and degree of concealment differ by case.
Figure 3.1 — Chronic Illness and Acute Crisis Require Different Tracks. A historical comparison separating chronic-function monitoring from acute-incapacity continuity procedures.
"Figure 4.1 — The 1988 Medical Cascade. A clinical timeline of aneurysm rupture, neurosurgery, pulmonary embolism, recovery, and long-term risk questions."
Figure 5.1 — What Presidential Capacity Requires. A capacity-domain map for the cognitive presidency.
Figure 5.2 — Capacity Is Not Diagnosis. A two-track diagram separating disease labels from functional capacity assessment.
"Figure 5.3 — Presence Is Not Performance. A president may work at the White House or elsewhere. Location does not establish capacity, and the absence of verification does not itself establish inability. Reliable assessment requires evidence of actual function."
"Figure INT I.1 — Screening Is Not Capacity Evaluation. A three-layer model separating brief screening, core capacity domains, and performance under realistic presidential load."
"Figure INT I.2 — The Presidential Simulation. A seven-stage crisis simulation testing retention, comparison, adaptation, authorization, and communication."
Figure INT I.3 — After an Abnormal Result. Assess urgency first. Immediate inability may require urgent constitutional action; a nonemergency finding calls for confirmation and reassessment. An abnormal test alone does not establish inability.
Figure 6.1 — Population PSA Guidelines vs Presidential Surveillance. A side-by-side comparison of population screening logic and high-consequence presidential surveillance logic.
Figure 6.2 — ADT and Capacity-Relevant Effects. A cautious map of treatment effects that may matter for presidential function when androgen-deprivation therapy is used.
"Figure 6.3 — The Confidentiality Bottleneck. A structural flow showing how privacy, privilege, consent, and lawful process determine whether capacity-relevant information can be reviewed."
Figure 7.1 — Grade and Stage Cannot Date the Beginning. A prostate-cancer timeline showing why grade and stage cannot reconstruct the date of biological onset.
"Figure 7.2 — PSA Is the Signal, MRI Is the Map, Biopsy Is the Proof. A three-part distinction between biomarker signal, imaging localization, and pathological confirmation."
"Figure 7.3 — Presidential Urology Review. The proposed review connects the clinical record, protected assessment, and a limited functional report. Relevant symptoms, prior testing, medication effects, treatment burden, and reassessment triggers remain part of the clinical review."
Figure 7.4 — Protected Disclosure Reduces Medical Leverage. A national-security comparison showing how protected review and limited disclosure reduce coercive leverage.
Figure 8.1 — The Protective Architecture. A model of the incentives that can surround and buffer a president under capacity concern.
Figure 8.2 — The Incentive to Hide. A decision-pressure map showing how opacity can arise from predictable incentives.
Figure 8.3 — Party Self-Harm Timeline. A campaign-cycle timeline showing how delayed truth can compress replacement options.
Figure 10.1 — Press Bubble and Controlled Access. A media-access funnel showing how controlled exposure can filter public perception.
Figure 10.2 — Compassion Is Not Accountability. A balanced scale showing compassion for the patient and accountability for the office.
Figure 11.1 — The Two-Direction Media Error Audit. A balanced newsroom audit of understatement and overstatement in presidential-health coverage.
"Figure 11.2 — The Presidential Health Evidence Ladder. A starting guide to source types; evidentiary weight also depends on the claim, directness, context, and independent corroboration."
Figure 12.1 — The Private Doctor and the Public Certifier. A two-role model separating confidential clinical care from accountable public certification.
"Figure 12.2 — Disclosure and Immunity. Patient authorization, a witness’s personal privilege, and a lawful immunity order are distinct legal questions. Use and derivative-use immunity restricts criminal use of compelled evidence; it is not a pardon. [104–105]"
Figure 13.1 — The Verification Gap. Acute and gradual changes can require assessment of function. Section 4 is not limited to sudden emergencies; a diagnosis alone does not determine inability. [100]
"Figure 13.2 — Who Should Decide? Oversight Models. A comparison of the current constitutional actors, an advisory clinical board, and a possible Section 4 “other body.”"
Figure INT II.1 — Guardrails Against Board Capture. Six institutional safeguards protecting an independent medical review board from partisan capture.
Figure INT II.2 — The Secure Medical Compartment. Nested evidence compartments separating the complete clinical record from limited public certification.
"Figure INT II.3 — Due Process and Independent Confirmation. A protected pathway for notice, evidence access, independent counsel, confirmation, and a reviewable record."
"Figure INT II.4 — Inability and Transfer. Temporary and persistent inability require proportionate assessment. Section 4 provides for an Acting President, not permanent removal, and preserves constitutional procedures for contest and return. [100]"
Figure 14.1 — Proposed Review Commission. Clinical evidence and independent medical assessment inform a proposed three-member judicial process review. Both sitting-Justice and retired-judge designs require constitutional analysis; neither is an existing presidential-health authority. [97–100]
Figure 14.2 — The Sealed Accuracy Hearing. A sealed review process for testing the accuracy and completeness of a public health certification.
Figure 15.1 — The Presidential Health Review Board. A structural diagram of the proposed presidential-health oversight body.
"Figure 15.2 — Capacity Under Pressure. Cyberattacks, market disruption, and security crises are illustrative demands on understanding, decision-making, and authorization. The diagram asserts no fixed response times."
"Figure 15.3 — Closed-Door Medical Review Workflow. A workflow from trigger event to secure assessment, board review, and limited certification."
Figure 15.4 — Presidential Health Disclosure Tiers. A privacy-respecting model that scales disclosure to functional consequence.
"Figure 16.1 — Proposed Reform Roadmap. Initial drafting, institutional commitment, a 2027 pilot target, and readiness before consequential nominating contests are proposed milestones. Phases may overlap; dates do not record completed action."
Figure 16.2 — The Public Implementation Dashboard. An institutional-readiness dashboard that excludes private medical information and candidate health scores.