One sentence keeps appearing in coverage of the $250 bill story: living people cannot appear on U.S. currency. The rule is real, it dates to 1866, and it exists because of a specific incident involving an obscure Treasury official who put his own face on a five-cent note.
The Spencer Clark incident
During the Civil War, the U.S. issued fractional currency — small-denomination paper notes used because coins were being hoarded. In the mid-1860s, a Treasury official named Spencer Clark was responsible for selecting portrait subjects for these notes. Asked to put William Clark of the Lewis and Clark expedition on a five-cent note, Spencer Clark put himself on it instead. When Congress discovered the substitution, the result was a permanent statutory ban on living people on U.S. currency.
What the statute actually says
The current codification, at 31 U.S. Code §5114(b), states: "Only the portrait of a deceased individual may appear on United States currency and securities." The provision applies to Federal Reserve notes — the paper bills in everyday circulation.
Why signatures are different
Trump's signature appearing on new $100 bills, announced separately in March 2026, does not violate the statute. Signatures of Treasury officials have routinely appeared on currency for over a century — the line drawn by the 1866 law is about portrait or likeness, not signature. The Treasury concluded that adding Trump's signature alongside Secretary Bessent's was a permissible administrative choice.
What it would take to change the law
H.R.1761 contains a clause creating a one-time exemption that would allow individuals who have served as President to appear on currency — bypassing the 1866 rule specifically for the $250 commemorative note. For that exemption to take effect, the bill would need to clear the House Financial Services Committee, pass the full House, pass the Senate, and be signed by the President. None of those steps has happened.
Constitutional considerations
Congress has plenary authority over U.S. currency under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution ("To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof"). That authority is broad enough that Congress could, if it chose, amend the 1866 rule. The constitutional question is not whether Congress has the power — it does — but whether there are political majorities willing to use it.