If a president is impeached can the be reelected in the next election?
If a current president is running for reelection and wins the election and the EC vote and is impeached before his new term happens, what happens?
After impeachment & conviction, in a separate, majority only vote the person can be disqualified for future office.
From Article, Section 3:
So the sentence in an impeachment trial can include disqualification for future office, but does not necessarily.
Of the 8 federal judges who have been impeached & convicted; 3 were explicitly disqualified from any future federal office; the other 5 were simply removed from office. I don’t believe any of those 5 ever again sought any federal office.
Former federal judge Alcee Hastings was removed from office in 1989. He’s been a Member of the US House of Representatives since 1993. I don’t know; is Member of Congress a federal office?
It’s a point in dispute. Most references in the Constitution to an office or officer of the United States seem to suggest they have to be in the Executive or Judicial branches, which means no prob with someone removed from office by impeachment being elected to Congress. The argument would be that the Reps and Senators are part of the legislative branch, not “officers”. They are the Representatives of the people and the states,
The difficulty this poses is that Congress’s power to set the presidential succession says that Congress can determine the “officer” of the US who succeeds to the presidency if there’s no president or veep. The statute currently puts the Speaker of the House as first in line after the Veep, then the president pro tem. of the Senate, followed by the Cabinet members, starting with the SecState.
If Reps and Senators aren’t “officers”, then how can Congress put these two individuals in the line of succession? But if not, if the Prez and the Veep both suddenly die in office, should the Presudency devolve on an entirely unelected officer, the Secretary of State?
Let’s hope there is never a reason to have to resolve this issue!
There have also been a number of impeachments of state-level positions. Alabama’s Roy Moore, for instance, was impeached and removed from his judgeship, but then re-won it anyway, and then ran for US Senate (and would have been eligible if he had won). I don’t know if Alabama’s impeachment procedure lacks the future bar option, or if the body who judged Moore just chose not to impose it.
Both times that Roy Moore was removed from the bench it was via complaints to Alabama’s Court of the Judiciary, not a legislative impeachment process.
Nitpick: Moore wasn’t removed from the bench the second time, just suspended. It just so happened that the suspension was for the remainder of his existing term and that he would be over the age limit to run for a new term by the time of the following election.
You’re right; turns out he was suspended the second time and then resigned in order to run for Senate.
Alabama’s legislature does retain the power to impeach officials, including judges, but they set up this statutory process with a special disciplinary court so they wouldn’t have to bother.
Even if Roy Moore had been impeached, removed, and barred under a state constitution, states cannot impose their own additional qualifications on federal offices, so Roy Moore would still be eligible to be elected to the US Senate.
ANAL but the positions of Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate may be Constitutional offices because they’re specified in the Constitution as being in line of succession to the presidency; other legislative positions are not. I may have missed a detail; are ACTING cabinet officers in line of succession even if unconfirmed by the Senate?
If there’s a benefit to be gained, it’ll be fought over.
No.
The Constitution doesn’t give a line of succession to the presidency after the vice president. Everything beyond that is up to Congress. From 1886 to 1947, they weren’t in line. (Another quirk is that before 1886, if both the presidency and vice presidency became vacant, the successor would only serve until an early presidential election could be completed. There were some proposals for this to be brought back in 1973, when it seemed possible that Nixon might end up going without being able to replace Agnew, to avoid Carl Albert having to govern with no real mandate for almost three years.)
The OP is pretty clearly asking if a President can be impeached and then re-elected President. The Constitution is very, very clear on the fact that Congress, upon convicting, can either prohibit that person being President again, or not, as they choose. There is no dispute at all.
My mistake. Thanks for the correction.
Here’s the clause in question:
What does “officer” mean here? Are Senators or Represenatives “officers”?
Congress has already decided that. It’s whatever they say it is, as per the Constitution.
Congress’ interpretation of a constitutional term is not binding on the Supreme Court.
And I learned it like this.
Each branch has Legislative officers, Executive officers, and Judicial officers.
Can executive officers be impeached? Obviously it’s in the Constitution and is in Article II no less. So Legislative officers can be impeached too right? I mean the Constitution says
In the impeachment of Sen. Blount
Well not so fast
That last part led to the Senate acquitting impeached officials that had resigned. It was only that the Senate took into account that as part of conviction they could bar the now ex-officer from holding office again that they decided it was within their jurisdiction to try people that left office before trial.
And besides, each House has the power to expel their own members.
But here is where I agree with you Northern Piper and feel that the discussion over the ability to try Blount should have easily been dispensed with (despite what I was taught)
BAM! Legislative officers are distinct from civil officers.
Now Judicial officers (judges and justices) are appointed for life - presuming good behavior. So how to remove a judicial officer for “bad behavior”. Hmmmnn. Removal from office for bad behavior sounds a lot like impeachment right? So I disagree that the Impeachment Clause applies to judicial officers but I do believe it is constitutional (or at least a political question) that Congress use the impeachment process to remove a judicial officer. But note, impeachment charges can for a judicial officer can extend beyond “high crimes and misdemenors” into bad behavior like drunkedness and unlawful rulings.*
*Which has caused me to come around on the Clinton/Nixon issue. I can see now why perjury for a judge is impeachable (bad behavior) but not for a President (not a high crime or misdemenor).