ipl-logo

The Impeachment Process

954 Words4 Pages

In the United States, both the Federal Government and the States have the authority to institute criminal proceedings. The Federal Government, as well as each State, have their own criminal system, their own court system, their own prosecutors, and their own police organizations. By virtue of both law and practice factors, the crimes that make the most frequently prosecuted are drug trafficking, organized crime, financial crime, fraud on a large scale, and crimes of particular federal interest and fraud against the United States. In addition, there are certain crimes which only the federal government can prosecute such as those related to tax issues, and crimes of espionage and treason. States bring criminal actions for delinquencies committed …show more content…

“The first step, the one that is technically the impeachment, is taken by the House of Representatives” (“United States Constitution”). Once the vote is taken and approved by the majority of the House, the second step is when the Senate enacts a trail to determine the conviction of the official, with a two-thirds majority required to convict. In the conviction of judges, there is an issue of “good behavior” and what falls under the category of “good behavior”. There is no direct description or diction for “good behavior,” therefore leaving the understanding of such a clause as one based on opinion rather than facts. “ Only 15 federal judges have ever been impeached and only eight have ever been convicted and removed … But even then, the “articles of impeachment,” the list of misconduct the accused is on trial for, have described quite a wide range of inappropriate behavior” (“United States …show more content…

District Court for the District of New Hampshire had become the first judge to go through the impeachment process. The cause of his impeachment was due to his mental instability and poor misconduct while on the bench (Turner). Other judges who have gotten impeached have either resigned from their position in hopes to keep their reputation clear or have been acquitted. Samuel Chase, the Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States but later acquitted for induction his political bias in this court cases in 1805 (“Senate Prepares for Impeachment Trial”). In 1830, James H. Peck had been impeached on charges of abuse of the contempt power, which is power grated to the courts to “… punish persons who show contempt for the process, orders, or proceedings of that institution. The contempt power aims to provide a means for a judge to uphold the dignity of the judicial process” (US Legal, Inc). A year later Peck had been

Show More
Related
124 Words | 1 Pages

In statement on the articles of impeachment, Barbara Jordan facts that proved Nixon to be irresponsible, dishonest and profoundly involved in illegal situations. Barbara outlined both logical and emotional reasons in her speech to convince the House of Reprenstatives, and the American public that the President Nixon should be impeached. She stated that Nixon authorized break-ins at Democratic campaign headquarters in Washington and that he was involved in many political dirty tricks and improprieties. She added also that the President Nixon had tearing the Constitution and if he he is not stopped, he will use his power given by the White House to commit more crimes. Barbara was emotional and showed that she loves her country which is not the

Read More
393 Words | 2 Pages

Rhetorical Analysis: in Barbara Jordan’s “Statement on the Articles of Impeachment” In 1976, the first African American Congresswoman took the podium to address the political problems in the U.S. She used every form of document in the constitution to prove that things can change if they were followed accordingly. This courageous woman, Barbara Jordan, wrote “Statements on the Articles of Impeachment”, delivered July 25, 1974 to the House Judiciary Committee and argued that if the President was to participate in anything suspicious and kept the person safe, he may be impeached. Jordan builds her credibility with the evidence of Richard Nixon’s activity with several things beyond out of order; during her speech she was forcefully optimistic

Read More
174 Words | 1 Pages

Numerous allegations of misconduct have been against Judge

Read More
499 Words | 2 Pages

I think Barbara Jordan did a great job defining impeachment and clarifying its criteria. In her speech, Jordan discusses impeachment and states, “We know the nature of impeachment. We’ve been talking about it a while now. It is chiefly designed for the President and his high ministers to somehow be called into account. It is designed to “bridle” the Executive if he engages in excesses.

Read More
610 Words | 3 Pages

The judicial review process is an important aspect of the US Court system. The process involves the use of powers by the Federal Courts to void the congress' acts that direct conflict with the Constitution. The Marbury v. Madison is arguably the landmark case that relates to Judicial Review. The Marbury v. Madison case was written in the year 1803 by the Chief Justice at that time named John Marshall. Thomas Jefferson won an election on the Democratic - Republican Party that had just been formed creating a panicky political atmosphere having defeated John Adams of the previous ruling party.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

Now, we address the following issues: Is it within Congress’s authority to remove an officer of the executive branch and appoint another in office? Does the act also violate the separation of power doctrine by granting the House of representative the authority to review and reject policies implemented by the new director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons? I argue that the act did not violate the principles of the constitution. The mechanisms set forth to appoint and remove a government official differs based on whether the person in question is a principal officer, or an inferior officer. In Morrison v. Olson, Justice Rehnquist describes how the two differ for purposes of appointment.

Read More
712 Words | 3 Pages

Did you know he was the first president to ever get impeached? After he vetoed the “Freemans Bureau” bill, the members of Congress overthrew the veto and he was sent to court for impeachment. Apparently, he was found innocent and after he was removed from the presidency, he decided to get re-elected for the Senate. He completed 2 tasks before he got impeached.

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

The water gates scandal is why President Nixon was being impeached but he resigned before the house voted on the Articles hence Nixon was not impeached during the

Read More
485 Words | 2 Pages

United States v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones should have had the same outcome from the Supreme Court. Both, former President 's violated the law and wanted to use presidential privileges to dismiss their cases. In the United States v. Nixon, the Court had the right to order the President to relinquish the tapes to Congress to use as evidence for the trial against the seven members held accountable. Those accused were owed a duty by the Court to be given a fair and speedy trial. In the Clinton v. Jones case, the Court should have not granted the former President Clinton immunity because the general public needs to realize that not even the President can violate the law and get away with it.

Read More
790 Words | 4 Pages

Sally Yates’s actions emboldened other branches of government and assured the nation that there were still those in the government who would solidly stand for the principles of the Constitution, no matter the political

Read More
222 Words | 1 Pages

The Constitution fastens the responsibility of trying impeachments upon the Senate. Yet some Senators have doubted whether they have the requisite competence to try impeachments . Rule XI was adopted as a response to poor attendance and preparation by Senators in impeachment trials in the early twentieth century. Yet even in the 1980s, some Senators claimed that they had not bothered to prepare before voting, and such proceedings diverted their energies away from legislative business of greater concern to their constituents. Others argued the proceedings restored their confidence in the Senate 's institutional competence to conduct them.

Read More
511 Words | 3 Pages

The United States is composed of national and state governments that all unite to help the people of this country. Under U.S Constitution a federal system was created declaring the National Government as the possessive supreme political authority. States are also allowed to be sovereign, deriving their power from people through their state’s constitution. The federalist system allows that each state has its own constitution, but they must comply with the U.S Constitution. The differences between the National Government and a State Government are seen in the laws and powers described in a state constitutions and in the U.S Constitution.

Read More
478 Words | 2 Pages

Hana Kim Professor Yvonne Wollenberg Law and Politics 106 7 October 2015 Title In the United States government, there are three branches called the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. Out of these three, the judicial branch is the most powerful. The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court, the court with the most power in the country, and other federal courts that are lower in the system; the purpose of this branch is to look over laws and make sure they are constitutional and reasonable.

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

However, in balancing those flaws with their benefits, America’s judge selection process is satisfactory. Having a mixed system helps to aid in checks and balances between the government and the voting power of the

Read More
944 Words | 4 Pages

Federalism Federalism is a system of government in which power is divided between federal government, state government and provinces government. While federalism has many benefits, among them is checks and balances between the federal and state government, thus reducing the chances of one party getting too powerful and abusing their power. Preventing one party from being too powerful and abusing their powers is a good thing. However, it comes with a price that federal and provinces (state and local) governments do not always see eye to eye and agree with each other, which turns into conflict.

Read More

More about The Impeachment Process

Related Topics

Open Document