Groundbreaking Impeachments in US History Quiz

Answer: Senator William Blount

Blount was accused by President John Adams of conspiring to seize Spanish Florida and Louisiana. On July 7, 1797 the House informed the Senate that it intended to pursue impeachment. On February 5, 1798 when the Articles of Impeachment were presented, the Senate started to develop the rules for trying impeachments. Over the next year, various rules adopted, many of which are still in effect. On January 11, 1799 the Senate dismissed the case.

The reason was that Blount had been expelled from the Senate on July 8, 1797, the day after he found out he was going to be impeached. He refused to attend the trial. After repeated refusals by Blount, the Senate changed the position of doorkeeper into Sergeant-of-Arms on February 5, 1798 and ordered him to arrest Blount. Blount refused to be arrested and stayed in Tennessee, but he did send lawyers to defend himself. The Senate could not decide whether or not they could try an ex-Senator and so eventually they dismissed the charges for lack of jurisdiction.

Answer: Harold Louderback

Part of the problem with the Louderback trial was that the Senate was busy with the first 100 days of The New Deal. Democrats charged Republicans with using the trial to delay voting on important bills. The trial was a circus that included 40 defense witnesses including a fortune-teller. The Senate eventually voted to acquit simply in order to end the trial.

The impeachment of all four of the judges listed and Judge George W. English took place between 1903 and 1936: all were accused of abusing their office for personal monetary gain. Of these five, English resigned, Archbald and Ritter were convicted, and Swayne and Louderback were acquitted. The Ritter case (1936) was to be the last impeachment for 50 years.

Answer: Claiborne

District Judge Harry E. Claiborne was jailed in 1984 for filing false income tax returns. He refused to do the honorable thing and resign as a judge, but stated that he would return to the position having served his sentence. The only way to formally remove a federal judge was impeachment - so that is what was done. Claiborne was impeached by the United States House of Representatives on July 22, 1986.

He was convicted by the U.S. Senate on October 9, 1986, removing him from office.

Answer: Secretary of War

Belknap indulged in an extravagant lifestyle despite being limited to a cabinet member's salary ($8000/yr in 1876). A House investigation traced back Belknap's corruption to 1870 with kickbacks for valuable trading post appointments to military bases. Despite the scandals rocking the Grant presidency, Belknap's parties and spending was too blatant to be ignored. He tearfully turned in his resignation as the House was voting on the Articles of Impeachment.

The House continued with the impeachment. It was in this trial that the Senate changed its rules and decided that it could try officials for crimes committed during their period of office (cf. the Blount case). This was because in addition to removal from office (moot in this case), the Senate could disqualify the person from ever holding another office again. Belknap was acquitted of all charges, not because he was innocent but because many Senators were reluctant to convict a (now) private citizen. This led the Senate to return to tradition and dismiss charges if the person accused resigned. The Senate need not have worried about Belknap seeking another office, he committed suicide in 1880.

Answer: Judge West Humphreys

A District Court judge from Tennessee during the Civil War, Humphreys took a judgeship for the Confederacy without resigning his US judgeship. This technically made him a traitor. He was also impeached for confiscating US property and arresting Union sympathizers. The impeachment paperwork was written and managed by Representative Bingham of Ohio, who performed the same role six years later when Andrew Johnson was impeached.

The vote on the impeachment resolution was not recorded, instead it is indicated that it was passed "without debate or division". Humphreys could not be served with the impeachment papers, so he was tried and convicted in abstentia. The only other conviction that resulted in disqualification from future office was that of Robert Archbald in 1913.

Answer: Alcee Hastings

Hastings was impeached and convicted of perjury and conspiracy to accept a bribe, but he was acquitted of the charges in a criminal court. Hastings sued to have his conviction overturned and was successful at the circuit court. What makes this trial a precedent is the fact that the Supreme Court overturned the circuit court's decision and upheld the Senate's conviction claiming that the Constitution gave the Senate the sole right to be the court to try impeachment cases and that the judiciary branch has no authority in these cases.

Hastings' conviction removed him from office but did not disqualify from future offices. Hastings was elected in 1992 to represent Florida's 23rd District. This put him in the hotspot of the Bush-Gore ballot controversy. An ardent Democrat, he accused the Republicans of trying to steal the election. In 2004, he led the European group overseeing the US Presidential election.

Answer: Mark Delahay

Pickering was the second person impeached and the first to be convicted. He was charged with public drunkeness, profanity while on the bench, making incorrect rulings, and possible insanity. Peck was charged with abusing his contempt-of-court power by jailing a journalist who wrote an article criticizing one of his rulings and was acquitted. Nixon was accused of perjury to a grand jury and was convicted.

All of these show how minor the "high crimes and misdemeanors" can be. The precedent in Delahay's case is that actions in his *private* life were considered impeachable. Some may argue that Pickering's case introduced his private life as an impeachable offense as he was called "a man of loose morals and intemperate habits" in the articles of impeachment. However, Pickering's impeachment was limited to these actions while on the bench. In Delahay's case, the impeachment charged him with drinking "on and off" the bench.

Technically, Delahay was never impeached. His situation was similar to President Richard Nixon in that the articles of impeachment had been passed in committee but were not voted on by the House. Delahay resigned and the House dropped the impeachment procedures.

Answer: True

Part of Blount's defense presented by Jared Ingersoll and A. J. Dallas (Blount refused to be present) was that legislators were not civil officers as defined by the Constitution. Article I Section 6 seems to imply that there is a division between legislators and officers of the United States. This seems to also be indicated by Article II Section 4 which applies impeachment to the executive branch.

But what about the judicial branch? This one is trickier. Judges are appointed for life contingent on "good behavior". However, there is no mechanism for removing a judge for bad behavior whereas there is a mechanism for expelling a member of the legislature (Article I Section 5 Clause 2). In addition, Article VI Clause 3 seems to separate the federal government into two groups: legislators and officers (both executive and judicial).

This means that members of the executive branch and judges can be impeached, but a member of Congress is immune from impeachment.

Answer: They filed a suit against Congress.

It's unbelievable, but it did happen! These judges filed suit in the mid 1970s claiming that the failure for Congress to increase their pay at a rate equal to that of inflation was in reality a reduction of their pay, which is illegal under the Constitution.

In 1976, Representative Jacobs wrote a resolution of impeachment against these 140 judges. It died in committee. The next year, he Jacobs tried again. That resolution died in committee as well.

Answer: Justice William Douglas

This quote is from Gerald Ford in 1970 when he tried to oust Supreme Court Justice William Douglas. Many charges brought to the Senate do not involve serious crimes, but usually are brought for political reasons. Convictions are often based on political reasons too.

Judge Pickering was convicted of making arbitrary rulings, yet Justice Chase was acquitted less than a year later on the same charges by claiming that the impeachment did not really contain substantive crimes. Their real crimes were to be Federalists when an Anti-Federalist government was in power. This lack of consistency in how impeachments are ruled upon even by the same senators was also noted in Questions 2 and 3.

So here is the tally at the end of 2004: 16 impeachments - 7 convictions, 7 acquittals, 2 dismissals.