Compelling Policy Question: What consequences should Congress consider when debating Impeachment?

Case Study: Articles of Impeachment against President Andrew Johnson (excerpts/link to original document)

Articles established by the House of Representatives..., in the name of themselves and all the people of the United States, against Andrew Johnson... (in) support of their impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE I

That said Andrew Johnson… did unlawfully and in violation of the Constitution... (try to remove) Edwin M. Stanton from the office of Secretary for the Department of War… (Andrew Johnson) was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

ARTICLE X.

Andrew Johnson... did attempt to bring into...hatred... the Congress of the United States... Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States…(said)

“I called upon your Congress that is trying to break up the Government… Congress... had undertaken to poison the minds of the American people.” (Washington D.C. 1866)

Andrew Johnson has brought the high office of the President of the United States into... disgrace, to the great scandal of all good citizens… (He) was then and there guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

ARTICLE XI

That said Andrew Johnson... in disregard of the Constitution and laws of the United States... (declared) that the Thirty-Ninth Congress of the United States was not a Congress of the United States…

Andrew Johnson, President of the United States..., did unlawfully and in disregard of the requirements of the Constitution... attempt to prevent the execution of...

“An act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices,”

“An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1868 and for other purposes,”

“An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States,”

(By doing so) Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did… commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.

And the House of Representatives...do demand that the said Andrew Johnson may be put to answer the high crimes and misdemeanors in office herein charged against him...

Historical Context:

On June 21, 1788 the Constitution was ratified. Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution said, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

On April 15, 1865 Vice President Andrew Johnson became president after Lincoln's assassination. Johnson disagreed with Radical Republicans in Congress. They were trying to guarantee the rights of the formerly enslaved people, and punish the former leaders of the Confederacy.

Johnson swore an oath to execute the laws of the United States. But, he refused to enforce the Reconstruction laws passed by Congress he disagreed with.

Congress had passed a law called the "Tenure of Office Act" to stop Johnson from firing Lincoln's Cabinet officials. Johnson tried to veto the Act, but was overridden by Congress.

The House of Representatives created Articles of Impeachment against Johnson when he tried to fire Secretary of War Edwin Stanton in 1868.

Section #1 Guiding Question: What arguments are made in favor of impeaching a President?

In 1868, a Republican from Pennsylvania named Thaddeus Stevens gave a speech to the House of Representatives about Johnson's impeachment. In it he said,

(Excerpts/ link to original document)

Now, in defiance of (the Office-Tenure Act) Andrew Johnson... commanded (Lorenzo Thomas) to take possession of the Department of War and to eject the incumbent, E M. Stanton.... Here, if this act stood alone, would be an undeniable official misdemeanor... and punishable in a criminal proceeding. If Andrew Johnson escapes with bare removal from office (and not prison time)... he may thank the weakness or the clemency of Congress and not his own innocence.

***

Nowhere, either in the Constitution or by statute, has the President power to create a vacancy (by firing an officer)... and fill it without the advice and consent of the Senate.... Here is a plain, recorded violation of the Constitution... every honest and intelligent man (should) give his vote for impeachment.

***

Andrew Johnson…(tried) to rule (the former Confederate States) by his own power alone... He is since known to have obstructed... the authority of Congress, and has advised the inhabitants (of the South) to resist the legislation of Congress. In my judgment his conduct… ought long ago to have brought him to impeachment and trial and to have removed him from his position of great mischief.

* * *

I trust that when we come to vote upon this question we shall remember that... the sovereign power of the nation rests in Congress, who have been placed around the Executive as... watchmen to enforce his obedience to the law and the Constitution. His oath to obey the Constitution and our duty to compel him to do it are a tremendous obligation.... We are to protect or to destroy the liberty and happiness of a mighty people. and defend (them) against every kind of tyranny...

In 1866, cartoonist Thomas Nast drew a cartoon titled “King Andy” in Harper’s Weekly.

Thomas Nast drew a cartoon titled “This little boy would persist in handling books above his capacity And this was the disastrous result”, for Harper’s Weekly in 1868.

Section #2 Guiding Question: What arguments are made against impeaching a President?

In 1868, a Democrat from New York named James Brooks gave a speech to the House of Representatives against impeaching Andrew Johnson. In his speech he said...

(Excerpts/link to original document) Brook's Biography

Mr. Speaker...

I... resist this... unconstitutional pro ceeding. [A] minority of the party on the other side... has at last succeeded in compelling its party to... demand the impeachment of the President of the United States.

[A] legislative power not representing the people attempts to... overthrow (the President).

There is nothing new in what we are doing, for men of the present but repeat the history of the past. We are traversing over and over again the days of Cromwell and Charles I and Charles II, and... the scenes of the French revolution, baptized in blood…

***

I bid... (the leaders of the House) beware before they proceed further in their revolutionary steps. Suppose you should succeed… what then? You can impeach the President of the United States for the hat he wears or for the color of his coat...

****

Proceed in your forms of impeachment... but step an inch further and over the bounds of that Constitution and... you precipitate this country upon the verge of violence and revolution...

***

[B]ecause he has exercised what in good faith he has believed to be his constitutional authority as President… (Mr. Stephens) summon(s) us here to... convict the President of crimes and misdemeanors...

***

The President is a primary judge of the Constitution. It is not only his right, but it is the right of every citizen, to judge of the Constitution of the United States...

***

I beg the House to consider the higher duties which it owes to this country and to itself than this impeachment of a President... We have higher, nobler, and better duties… History will make the record of our startling proceedings.

***

Here, for the first time in the history of our country, a party committee comes before Congress and demands the (removal) of the President of the United States... I beg the party upon the other side to consider the fatal danger of establishing such a precedent as this.

In 1868, the magazine Harper's weekly published an engraving called "The Situation".

Source

Library of Congress Summary: Print shows Ulysses Grant and Edwin Stanton near a cannon labeled "Congress" aimed at Lorenzo Thomas and President Johnson.

Results of the debate:

In 1868, the House of Representatives voted 126 to 47 (17 members did not vote) in favor of a resolution to impeach the president. The House then adopted the 11 Articles of Impeachment (used above in the Case Study). After being impeached by the House of Representatives, President Andrew Johnson's case was sent to the Senate for his trial.

At that time the Senate was made up of 54 Senators representing 27 states, (10 States had yet to be readmitted following the Civil War).

Senate voted on only three of the articles of impeachment. All three votes resulted in counts of 35(guilty) to 19(not guilty). Because the Constitution requires a 2/3rds of the members of the Senate to vote "guilty" to convict a President of Impeachment, the Senate was one vote short of convicting Andrew Johnson.

It should be noted, that one reason Senators may have voted against Impeaching Johnson was not because they believed what he did wasn't wrong, but instead because they were worried about the Radical Republican Senator Benjamin Wade who would have become President if Johnson was impeached.

Andrew Johnson was able to finish out his term as President, leaving the Presidency on March 4th, 1869. However, during the remainder of his term Johnson was unable to influence policy, and he stopped resisting Congress' powers.