Constitutional Law Question

Hey Paula · #1 03-06-2009, 01:16 AM

Can the American people call for the impeachment of a president?

In a case where both Houses of Congress share the same majority party as the president, and hence might be reluctant to remove him from office, does the majority voice of the People rule?

TIA to all respondents.

BeetlebrowII · #2 03-06-2009, 02:00 AM

I believe that only the congress can impeach a president. And even then I think they have to do so with more than the majority (2/3?)
This should be easy to google!

Hey Paula · #3 03-06-2009, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlebrowII

I believe that only the congress can impeach a president. And even then I think they have to do so with more than the majority (2/3?)
This should be easy to google!

Thanks for your reply!

When I searched, I only found references to Congress. I was more interested in the role of the People, should they disagree with Congress, especially where there is a party majority.

Jay · #4 03-06-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hey Paula

Can the American people call for the impeachment of a president?

In a case where both Houses of Congress share the same majority party as the president, and hence might be reluctant to remove him from office, does the majority voice of the People rule?

TIA to all respondents.

The Constitution is very exact and explicit on the Impeachment process:

Article 1, sec. 2, clause 5:

The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment.

Article 1, sec. 3, clause 6:

The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.

The House need only have a simple majority vote to Impeach, 218, but conviction and removal requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate.

Being somewhat familiar with Constitutional law, I do know that Andrew Johnson was aquitted in his Senate trial by only one vote, but, of course, there were less Senator's back then.

To specifically answer your Q, although public outcry plays an important role in the legislative process at times, on this issue, thier voice of "impeach or I'll vote you out next term" has little weight to them.

Hey Paula · #5 03-06-2009, 02:05 PM

Thanks so much for your reply, Jay!

I had hoped you would reply to my post because I value your opinion and legal wisdom.

Based upon my searches, unfortunately I suspected the answer to my question matched your reply. I wonder why our founding fathers didn't make provisions for situations where a president might harm this Country and is backed by both Houses?

Thanks again!

Jay · #6 03-06-2009, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hey Paula

Thanks so much for your reply, Jay!

I had hoped you would reply to my post because I value your opinion and legal wisdom.

Why thank you!! That was a very kind thing to say.

I appreciate it.

Quote:

Based upon my searches, unfortunately I suspected the answer to my question matched your reply. I wonder why our founding fathers didn't make provisions for situations where a president might harm this Country and is backed by both Houses?

Thanks again!

You may be equating it, in a way, with the Amendment process, where the states can submit an AM as well as the Congress proposing one:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut....articlev.html

The state legislature convention method has never been used though.

In my experience, state legislatures more often hear what the electorate think. Congress does not care about anything anymore except thier pensions and huge salaries.

I know what you are saying about the process though. Clinton was impeached just over the majority in the House, only 3 or 4 democrats swung over.

It's ALL politics, if a republican says no, a democrat says yes, if a republican says white, a democrat says black.

There is no ethical way an impeachment should be along party lines, either Clinton committed crimes or he didn't.

I think the FF's were wise to not include any other removal process, as back then, the Nation was young and loyalty to one's Country was a genuine thing. Now, it is not, and the process may need revision, I agree.