Impeach

Why President Trump has left us with no choice but to remove him from office, as explained by celebrated Supreme Court lawyer and former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal.

This brilliantly argued and wonderfully written collection by twenty-two of the best political analysts in the US analyzes the extraordinary and unprecedented threat the White House and its allies present to civil liberties, civil rights, the Constitution, international law, and the future of the planet. Impeach the President unearths the stories behind election fraud in 2000 and 2004, the overt lies used to justify pre-emptive war on Iraq, the extensive, ongoing commission of war crimes and torture, the tragic failures in the lead-up to and aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and lesser-known but equally alarming offences of propaganda and disinformation, illegal spying, environmental destruction, and the violation of the separation of church and state. Loo and Phillips chillingly reveal the full threat behind the radical right-wing force that has taken over the world’s most powerful office.

Four experts on the American presidency examine the three times impeachment has been invoked—against Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton—and explain what it means today. Impeachment is a double-edged sword. Though it was designed to check tyrants, Thomas Jefferson also called impeachment “the most formidable weapon for the purpose of a dominant faction that was ever contrived.” On the one hand, it nullifies the will of voters, the basic foundation of all representative democracies. On the other, its absence from the Constitution would leave the country vulnerable to despotic leadership. It is rarely used, and with good reason. Only three times has a president’s conduct led to such political disarray as to warrant his potential removal from office, transforming a political crisis into a constitutional one. None has yet succeeded. Andrew Johnson was impeached in 1868 for failing to kowtow to congressional leaders—and, in a large sense, for failing to be Abraham Lincoln—yet survived his Senate trial. Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974 after the House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment against him for lying, obstructing justice, and employing his executive power for personal and political gain. Bill Clinton had an affair with a White House intern, but in 1999 he faced trial in the Senate less for that prurient act than for lying under oath about it. In the first book to consider these three presidents alone—and the one thing they have in common—Jeffrey A. Engel, Jon Meacham, Timothy Naftali, and Peter Baker explain that the basis and process of impeachment is more political than legal. The Constitution states that the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” leaving room for historical precedent and the temperament of the time to weigh heavily on each case. This book reveals the complicated motives behind each impeachment—never entirely limited to the question of a president’s guilt—and the risks to all sides. Each case depended on factors beyond the president’s behavior: his relationship with Congress, the polarization of the moment, and the power and resilience of the office itself. This is a realist view of impeachment that looks to history for clues about its potential use in the future.

This book sets out and explores the case for a modernised impeachment process for the United Kingdom. The work examines the present law and history of impeachment in the United Kingdom, which today is widely regarded as having fallen into desuetude and its procedures inappropriate for modern conditions. It discusses how impeachment operates in two countries, the United States and Denmark, selected respectively for their marked differences from and similarities to the United Kingdom’s political and constitutional system, for the purposes of illumination and possible lessons for a new impeachment process. The book seeks to provide a balanced and independent examination of the case for this, concluding that it would have a valuable role to play in the future development of the United Kingdom’s system of politics and government. It concludes by setting out a detailed model for the structure, working and effect of impeachment. The book will be of interest to students, academics and policy-makers working in the areas of constitutional law and politics.

A revisionist account of the impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson identifies specific incendiary behaviors on the part of the seventeenth president that the author believes failed to heal post-Civil War America.

Cass Sunstein considers actual and imaginable arguments for a president’s removal, explaining why some cases are easy and others hard, why some arguments for impeachment are judicious and others not. In direct and approachable terms, he dispels the fog surrounding impeachment so that all Americans may use their ultimate civic authority wisely.

Originally published at the height of the Watergate crisis, Charles Black's classic Impeachment: A Handbook has long been the premier guide to the subject of presidential impeachment. Now thoroughly updated with new chapters by Philip Bobbitt, it remains essential reading for every concerned citizen. Praise for Impeachment: "To understand impeachment, read this book. It shows how the rule of law limits power, even of the most powerful, and reminds us that the impact of the law on our lives ultimately depends on the conscience of the individual American."--Bill Bradley, former United States senator "The most important book ever written on presidential impeachment."--Lawfare "A model of how so serious an act of state should be approached."--Wall Street Journal "A citizen's guide to impeachment. . . . Elegantly written, lucid, intelligent, and comprehensive."--New York Times Book Review "The finest text on the subject I have ever read."--Ben Wittes

The little understood yet great power of impeachment lodged in the Congress is dissected in this text through history by Raoul Berger, a leading scholar on the subject. He sheds new light on whether impeachment is limited to indictable crimes, on whether there is jurisdiction to impeach for misconduct outside office, and on whether impeachment must precede indictment. Berger also finds firm footing in contesting the views of one-time Judge Robert Bork and President Nixon's lawyer, James St Clair.