Posted on 12/04/2019 12:53:43 PM PST by Signalman
With impeachment hearings underway into President Donald Trump’s conduct, America has sailed into largely uncharted waters.
While there have been demands for the impeachment of many presidents, just three previous ones – Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton – have faced formal impeachment inquiries, and the Senate convicted none of them. None of those three sought reelection.
After Johnson’s acquittal, he was denied his party’s presidential nomination. Nixon and Clinton were in their second terms already and could not run for reelection.
Trump, however, is already doing so.
As a scholar of American legal and political history, I have studied the precedents for dealing with this strange conundrum. A little-known wrinkle in the Constitution might allow Trump to be reelected president in 2020 even if he is removed from office through the impeachment process.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
At the time the Constitution was ratified in 1788, many of its authors regarded impeachment as an improvement over the violent methods often used in Europe to get rid of corrupt rulers. Nonetheless, they recognized the dangers that impeachment would always present.
Alexander Hamilton. John Trumbull, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston/Wikimedia Commons As if commenting on the current moment, Alexander Hamilton noted in 1788, that it will “agitate the passions of the whole community, and … divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases, it will connect itself with preexisting factions and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or the other.”
The Founders were careful about defining and regulating this dangerous power. They gave the House of Representatives “the sole Power of Impeachment,” and specified that the Senate “shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments,” with a two-thirds majority required for conviction. They specifically prevented the president’s pardon power from reversing impeachments.
They also limited the possible punishments that the Senate may impose to “removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” But they only required that an impeached and convicted official “be removed from office” – but did not mandate that the person also be disqualified from holding a future office.
Nowhere does the Constitution define the standards for disqualification. Moreover, the Senate has declined to establish a standard.
But, as Ohio State University law professor William Foley points out, Senate procedures require separate votes to convict someone of an impeachable offense and to impose a disqualification penalty.
So even if President Trump were impeached and convicted, there is the possibility that he could be reelected to the same office from which he had been removed.
IMPEACHMENT AND DISQUALIFICATION
Of the 17 historic impeachment proceedings brought against judges and other officials who rank lower than president, 14 went to trial in the Senate and eight resulted in a guilty verdict.
In only three of those cases did the Senate bar – or “disqualify” – those who were convicted from holding office in the future.
First was West H. Humphreys, a federal district judge from Tennessee at the start of the Civil War, who refused to hold court and announced his support for the Confederacy. He was impeached and disqualified on charges of neglecting his judicial duties and waging war against the government of the United States.
In 1913, Robert W. Archbald, an associate judge of the United States Commerce Court, was convicted of the more prosaic offense of doing business with litigants before his court, and forever barred from holding office. The Senate found that he “willfully, unlawfully, and corruptly took advantage of his official position.”
The third instance of removal and disqualification occurred in 2010. In that case, Congressman Adam Schiff, now one of the key players in the Trump impeachment hearings, took the lead in prosecuting Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Louisiana. Porteous was found guilty of receiving cash from lawyers who had dealings in his court, of fraudulent dealings with creditors and of misleading the Senate during his confirmation proceedings.
History also reveals one curious instance of impeachment without disqualification, in which the person convicted ran for and won another office. Federal district judge Alcee Hastings of Florida was removed from office in 1989 for perjury and conspiring to solicit a bribe. Since 1993, he has been representing a Florida district in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Other people charged with perjury and bribery, as well as crimes like tax evasion, also have been convicted but not disqualified. In the end, it’s hard to say what distinguishes those cases from the others.
WHAT THE SENATE MIGHT DECIDE
Professor Foley writes that if President Trump is impeached and convicted, the Senate should follow the Hastings precedent and not prevent him from running again for office. In Foley’s view, the American electorate should “decide whether Trump, despite his attempt to subvert the system, should have another chance.”
Given the timing of an impeachment vote in the House and a Senate trial, a verdict could be rendered with the 2020 general election campaign in full swing, or even between Election Day and inauguration. This would create serious doubt and deep division about whether a president removed from office could legitimately take the oath of office again. Such a result might, as the president himself tweeted, “cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.”
To avoid that severe a split, uphold the Founders’ view of impeachment and minimize the perils of division that they feared, the Senate should, if the president is convicted, heed Alexander Hamilton’s advice and disqualify him too, ensuring that impeachment and removal from office results in “a perpetual ostracism from the esteem and confidence and honors and emoluments of … (this) country.”
How many FReepers believe Pelosi is STUPID ENOUGH to bring impeachment up for a vote, knowing it would mean Trump VINDICATION in the Senate...just before elections?
Yeah he could but if Trump were impeached, convicted, and removed then the chances of his being re-elected are about zero.
Which, coincidentally, are the same chances of Trump being impeached, convicted, and removed in the first place.
She knows there is no chance of removal in the Senate. This is all for politics and the hopes that it will make a good issue for the next election.
If the U.S. Senate went through all the trouble of removing President Trump on the basis of non-existent wrongdoing, then who in their right mind would ever expect them NOT to disqualify him from holding office in the future?
I think Pelosi will do it to just to see if the Rino’s in the Senate cross over...
There are plenty of RINOs that continue to block “The Wall” that would vote to convict in a heartbeat...and that includes Mitch-the-Bitch and his loyal RINO lapdogs.
IN short, yes, if the Senate, should the convict, not declare he may never hold office again, then yes he could be re-elected to the Presidency.
But this isn’t going to happen, because Trump will not be convicted, even if the democrats stupidly try to pass articles... this thing is a joke.... it ain’t “playing in Peoria” as the saying goes.
Trust The Plan
Sure. And Hillary Clinton had no chance of losing in 2016. All the polls said so.
There is no limit to the depth of stupidity to which a Democrat, or progressive of any stripe, can plunge, once their hatred is blazing.
The question is, has Pelosi’s blazing yet, or is the fire just beginning to heat up?
If Trump is convicted, those senators are going to have a lot more to worry about than that.
If the Senate convicts - they will regret their life choices.
The answer is No. The reason is because unless Trump is there to do something about vote fraud before the next election then the democrats will have not trouble winning. They now have very deep control of the ballot box.
He could also have Pence name him as the new VP, then have Pence step down, and then name Pence as his new VP. Impeachment instantly reversed!
Impeached, yes. But no way will it be he be removed.
Then he’ll be re-elected.
For that scenario to work, a majority of the House of Representatives (along with a majority of the Senate) would have to confirm Trump as the new VP. Would not happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.