Impeachment

Impeachment Forum: Abstract

Impeachment, Removal and Congressional Oversight

By: Robert S. Carney Jr. – 6/2/04

Go to: Home page or Impeachment Forum page or Impeachment Forum articles page

The claims

The president and the cabinet can be "fired by congress" -- impeached and removed from office with no issue of criminal law -- whenever the national interest demands it.

When executive branch civil officers are impeached for criminal grounds, both the senate and the judiciary have independent powers to try the case -- a conviction in either venue requires removal from office under article II.

The constitution provides additional legal means for removal from office.

Consequences

The constitutional intent is for both a higher standard of conduct for presidents and cabinet secretaries, and for more accountability to congress and the American people than we have realized.

Congress has much stronger oversight powers, and a greater oversight duty than we have realized.

Present Application

Congress can "fire" secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld, and/or others, for failing to prevent the torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners. The American people can hold individual members of congress responsible for their vote to do this -- or not do this -- both before the coming election, and after the election.

Implication

Over time, this theory has the potential to provide a broad basis of agreement about what we can and should expect from our government and from our leaders. Had this theory been known and accepted earlier

a) it could have potentially prevented both what led to the Clinton impeachment and Abu Ghraib, because

b) it provides both stronger and more effective corrective measures for both cases. Specifically:

Clinton's case could have been sent to a judicial court (probably to the supreme court directly), without disrupting the senate.

Civilian leaders can be held responsible for preventing anything like Abu Ghraib both now and in the future.

The interpretation

This theory is based essentially on a "strict constructionist" or "original meaning" approach to the constitution. It is firmly rooted in the exact words, and the structure of arrangement of the words, in the constitution itself.

A final comment

Fundamentally, this theory is rooted in an awareness of the dangers of government power in the hands of fallible and corruptible people, and the need to have as many safeguards as possible to prevent the misuse or abuse of that power. The implications of this theory go much further. We must realize that because this theory is so different from the current theory of impeachment, that in the immediate future it would certainly be wrong to apply it further than to removal from office.

Go to: Home page or Impeachment Forum page or Impeachment Forum articles page