Can impeach the president

It is not a criminal trial but a process to remove a high-level official, usually only a president in the US. The US constitution says the president "shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanours". Christopher Steele: Confessions of a former British spy.

Christopher Steele: Russia 'at war' with UK, says former British spy - who was left wedding rings 'threat'. Anybody can initiate the process, from a member of the house to a judge or even a public petition. A simple majority vote is then required from the house for the process to proceed to the senate, which has the power to try impeachments to ultimately oust a president from office. A collection of house members are made "managers" to present the prosecution case while the impeached official has the right to mount a defence with their own lawyers.

It is usually overseen by the vice-president but for a presidential impeachment the chief justice of Supreme Court presides. The senate then decides on whether to convict or acquit, with two thirds - 67 senators - needed to finally remove the accused. Three occupants of the Oval Office have seen impeachment proceedings launched against them, but no president has been successfully removed from office through the process. The House has initiated impeachment proceedings more than 60 times but less than a third have led to full impeachments.

Just eight—all federal judges—have been convicted and removed from office by the Senate. Trump in and ], a cabinet secretary William Belknap in , and a U. Senator William Blount of Tennessee in have also been impeached. In only three instances—all involving removed federal judges—has the Senate taken the additional step of barring them from ever holding future federal office. Blount, who had been accused of instigating an insurrection of American Indians to further British interests in Florida, was not convicted, but the Senate did expel him.

Other impeachments have featured judges taking the bench when drunk or profiting from their position. Farrand, Max, ed. The Records of the Federal Convention of Kyvig, David E. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, Les Benedict, Michael. The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson. New York: W. The Federalist Papers. New York: Penguin Books, It is not better for the state that traitors should remain in office than that innocent men should be expelled.

Besides, it is true in relation to this procedure, that the higher the post the higher the crime. Neither the Constitution nor the statutes have determined. It follows, therefore, that the House must judge for what offences it will present articles, and the Senate decide for what it will convict. And from the very nature of the wrongs for which impeachment is the sole adequate remedy, as well as from the fact that the office of President and all its duties and relations are new, it is essential that they should be undefined; otherwise there could be no security for the state.

But it does not by any means follow that therefore either the House or the Senate can act arbitrarily, or that there are not rules for the guidance of their conduct. There was no need of definition, for it was left to the House as exhibitors, and the Chief Justice and the Senate as judges of the articles, to apply well-understood terms, mutatis mutandis , to new circumstances, as the exigencies of state, and the ends for which the Constitution was established, should require.

The subject-matter was new; the President was a new officer of state; his duties, his relations to the various branches of government and to the people, his powers, his oath, functions, duties, responsibilities, were all new. In some respects, old customs and laws were a guide. In others, there was neither precedent nor analogy. But the common-law principle was to be applied to the new matters according to their exigency, as the common law of contracts and of carriers is applied to carriage by steamboats and railroads, to corporations and expresses, which have come into existence centuries since the law was established.

Removal is another issue entirely. To swiftly remove a president, both chambers—and parties—would have to work together. The Constitution is largely mute on how a Senate trial must be conducted. It only requires three things: that senators take an oath, that the chief justice of the Supreme Court preside, and that conviction takes a two-thirds majority vote.

The Senate abides by a set of impeachment trial rules it adopted in , and each Senate approves trial proceedings specific to each case. But the Senate majority leader has considerable leeway in determining how the trial itself plays out.

The speediest impeachment trial ever, Trump's trial in , took 18 days. To expedite a trial, lawmakers would have to be willing to set tradition aside. But even with an expedited trial, the Senate would need a supermajority—67 out of senators—to convict. Even if a president leaves office before removal, it doesn't preclude an attempt to permanently disqualify him from future office. Though there is no precedent with a president, the House did impeach former War Secretary William Belknap on five articles of impeachment in after his resignation.

A majority voted to convict Belknap in the Senate, but a supermajority was not achieved, and he was acquitted. If a Senate trial were to take place after Trump's term ends on January 20, it would occur with a different balance of party power. Democrats just picked up two Senate seats in runoff elections in Georgia and will have a majority once those votes are certified.

Since those seats will create a split in the Senate, the Democrats will not officially have a majority until President-Elect Joe Biden takes office and Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris becomes president of the Senate. If the House were to delay sending the impeachment to the Senate until January 20, they could do so with assurance that presumptive Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will order a trial.

Although Pelosi had originally threatened impeachment only if Vice President Mike Pence did not act to remove the president using the 25 th Amendment, there are advantages to pursuing impeachment instead. The 25th Amendment can only be invoked by the vice president and a majority of Cabinet members, but Congress controls the impeachment process.

If a vice president and Cabinet were to remove a president under the 25 th Amendment, that president would still be able to run for future office. If an impeachment trial resulted in a conviction, on the other hand, lawmakers could vote to bar a president from ever serving again.

All rights reserved. American Insurrection. In a historic first, a U. Here's what happens next. Capitol on Tuesday, Feb. Trump delivered the address after having been impeached by the House of Representatives.