At long last, election 2024 is upon us. Six days from now, November 5th, marks E-Day. But when the 47th president of the United States is formally determined may take weeks or months. In that context and as this column has noted, in the UK November 5th is Guy Fawkes Day when in 1605, a plot to blow up Parliament was uncovered. That may have meaning. According to polls, few elections have been closer. As in 2000 and 2020 the results almost certainly will be contested. Unless one of the candidates wins the popular vote by a significant margin and the Electoral College, the magnitude of these claims could be massive. In 2000, the Supreme Court had only one case to resolve: Bush v. Gore. Suppose there are dozens of cases that need resolution. The Judiciary could be overwhelmed. There is another worrying aspect of the election that is procedural and not related to the candidates. The transition of administrations will take place over seventy-six days from November 5th until January 20th and the inauguration. Because Kamala Harris became the nominee only after President Joe Biden withdrew, she has had a truncated period to consider who might serve in her administration. Donald Trump has publicly acknowledged that after his 2016 victory he was not sufficiently familiar with Washington to put in place an administration to his liking. As someone who visited Trump Tower in New York during this transition then, it was chaos. Trump was correct. The transition went very poorly. Our adversaries may choose to ignore this vulnerability instead allowing the American political process to do its worst. Unless Harris is prepared to retain a substantial portion of the Biden team, her transitions may prove to be as rocky as Trump’s first given the time constraints. And another factor may upset this transition. Suppose on January 20th, 2025, the Electoral College has failed to choose a president. In that case, the Speaker of the House will assume the presidency-Michael Johnson or Hakim Jeffries depending upon which party wins control of the chamber. Common sense would conclude that Biden appointees might be asked to continue to serve. Or a significant number of cabinet heads would be “acting,” namely officials who have been Senate confirmed and elevated on a temporary basis. Americans may be amused or frustrated with this situation. But here is a crucial and unasked question: would America’s adversaries exploit this transition period when the government is not fully formed irrespective of whether an elected president has taken the oath of office? And another procedural issue could have even greater impact. Even in so-called “normal” times, given the Senate confirmation process, it takes many months for an administration to be fully formed. Suppose that the Senate and president are from different parties. Would that make the confirmation process even more testing? All this suggests that the US faces a potential electoral vulnerability in which its government may not be able to respond sufficiently to major foreign crises as well as being susceptible to political interference by our adversaries. Former KGB agent Vladimir Putin surely appreciates this condition and opportunities as does China’s President Xi Jingping. One wonders who in both parties is aware of this potential vulnerability. And even if there were full awareness, what could be done to lessen the likelihood of those wishing us ill to exploit this vulnerability? Of course, our adversaries may choose to ignore this vulnerability instead allowing the American political process to do its worst. Yet, is this too tempting an opportunity to forgo? And if it is, how might that unfold? The most dire cases are if Russia were to escalate in Ukraine by threatening the use of nuclear weapons or North Korean soldiers to overwhelm the Ukrainian army and China threaten to invade Taiwan. The Biden administration of course remains in power until January 20th. So a potential timetable for major escalation would likely not start until mid to late January. During the transition interim however, foreign interference is a fact of life. Fortunately, the government agencies that are tasked with dealing with these threats largely consist of career professionals who are not directly affected by whatever vulnerabilities that may exist. But one conclusion is inescapable. Thomas Jefferson believed the Constitution should be revised as the times demanded. The Founding Fathers never anticipated these potential vulnerabilities that could arise from the electoral process. In recognition of modern transportation, the inauguration date was constitutionally changed from March 4th to January 20th. Another constitutional change to relieve these vulnerabilities is essential. But it may take a catastrophe for that to happen. The writer is a senior advisor at Washington, DC’s Atlantic Council and a published author. He can be reached on Twitter @harlankullman.