It’s the phrase, “for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy,” that has triggered uncertainty among election-law attorneys. Is it illegal to announce an appointment to gain support from the appointee? Is it illegal to do so to gain support from the public? Both? Neither?

Experts have varying interpretations of the language. Yet they agree that it is sufficiently vague to make any prosecution extremely difficult, save for specific and overwhelming evidence.

“My view is the statute is clearly intended at, essentially, bribery,” says Brad Smith, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission. “It cannot be read to make it impossible for someone to talk about who they might appoint to office, or even to potentially promise to appoint people to office.”

The issue has never been thoroughly examined, since no candidate — or nominee — has ever dared to put the cart so far ahead of the horse. Naming a cabinet member before winning the White House “would be totally unprecedented,” says Aaron Crawford, a fellow at Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History. “Vetting a vice president is seen as the first act of governance, and a lot can go wrong. You start layering more people onto that and you have a process that grows exponentially. And then, not only do you have to deal with the potential negatives of the V.P., but the potential negatives of cabinet members.”