The US constitution establishes the impeachment process of a president. The House of Representatives has the mandate to start the process of impeachment whenever the president commits crimes that are worth impeachments such as abuse of the office and treason. The president has many powers but is also responsible for national security. Any decisions made that endangers the lives of citizens, and any misuse of the powers given to him is considered an offense, and therefore may lead to impeachment.
The Impeachment Process
The House of Representatives establishes a list of charges against the president, also called the Articles of Impeachment. This document well describes the offenses that the House of Representatives deem to be committed by the president, and the specific instances and times that these atrocities were committed. The house votes on whether these accusations are valid. If two-thirds of the house considers the accusations valid, the Articles of Impeachment is then presented to the Senate.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
After the above, the Senate then considers this document in a trial. The trial is presided over by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. A hundred senators serve as the jury. The president is given the platform to defend his actions and justify why he did what he did. The jury then votes.
Sixty-seven votes in favor of the conviction, the supermajority vote, renders the accusations valid, and thus leading to the removal of the president from office. The Congress, however, cannot impose criminal penalties on the president. The atrocities committed are taken to court, and the president is tried and charged. The atrocities that a president can be impeached for are treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.
High Crimes and Misdemeanors
High crimes mean offenses of high criminal activities while misdemeanors are small crimes. The phrase, however, does not give a clear meaning as it is used in the constitution (Edwards III & Wayne, 2013). It merely means forms of abuse to the office. Historically, this has been used wrongly without accusing the president of any crime while trying to impeach them. For example, in 1868, President Andrew Johnson underwent impeachment trials for firing his secretary of war. This approach shows how historically this phrase is open to the interpretation of the Congress.
The term above can be subject to different beliefs and objectives. The Congress may decide to impeach a president based on what they feel is the abuse of the office when the president is merely doing his job. If Congress is not in favor of the president’s decision, they may decide to call it high crimes and misdemeanors. Consequently, the president may always need to make decisions that please the Congress to avoid impeachment. It implies that the presidents’ ruling is dependent on the Congress. The Congress can impeach or initiate the process of impeachment at the smallest of decisions, however irrelevant. No president wants to go down in history as the one whom the Congress tried to impeach. Therefore, presidents are likely to seek to have most of the Congress on their side. It might have negative implications, however, as real crimes done against the office may go unpunished just because the president has the majority of the Congress in his favor.
The spectrum of the phrase ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is too broad. It ranges from actual crimes to the congressmen’s feelings on what they think is an abuse of power, whether or not it is (Edwards III & Wayne, 2013). This term should, therefore, be revised. It should be limited to a spectrum of crimes, those that are an abuse of office and power, and the decisions that endanger the lives of citizens. For instance, if a president decides to fire the secretary of defense for insubordination purposes without evidence, such can be taken as an abuse of power. The Congress may choose to file accusations on many levels, whether it is a matter of national security or if the president is abusing the office. However, his reasons are only considered valid if the president has most of the house (that is two thirds) on his side. If the majority feels that he should not have fired that secretary, the president goes to trial. His reputation, therefore, goes down in history as stained, despite the purest of intentions he had. Despite this phrase helping in maintaining some level of balance in the office of the president and regulating his powers, it is open to misuse. It may present opportunities for abuse of power by the entire house of Congress if they decide to come together in committing such crimes. It is, therefore, open to misapplication. The phrase should, therefore, be revised. Particularly, the phrase should be limited to clear and precise offenses by the president.
Conclusion
The process of impeaching the president is open to scrutiny. The president undergoes a fair trial before being impeached. However, the implications are catastrophic. The presidency is the highest rank of office, and therefore whatever happens to it is noted in history. An attempt to impeach the president is a historical event. Whether impeached or not, no president wants to be remembered in that sense. None wants to be remembered as the president whose congress tried to impeach them. Therefore, reasons to initiate the impeachment process should be concrete and not open to the beliefs and objectives of the Congress.
References
Edwards III, G. C., & Wayne, S. J. (2013). Presidential leadership: Politics and policy making . Cengage Learning.
