# Historically, does impeachment power extend to people who MAY hold office? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 8, 2016, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040 "2016-11-08T02:05:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Ace309](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ace309/32/1050_2.png) [@Ace309](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ace309)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/1 "2016-11-08T02:05:45Z")
On an imgur thread this morning, a disagreeable fellow posited the following: 1. Congress has the power to impeach individuals who are not currently in office. 2. Impeachment may result in the disqualification of a citizen to hold public office, per Article I Section 3. 3. Congress could, in theory, impeach Hilary Clinton and disqualify her from holding office. (This was wrapped into a conspiracy theory about the Republicans tacitly accepting Clinton as the next President.) Is there any historical precedent for proposition 1? This person argued that since the House printed Nixon’s impeachment into the congressional record after he resigned, there is procedural precedent; he also made the argument that allowing someone to avoid impeachment by resigning would render the possible punishment of disqualification impossible to enforce. Neither objection rings true to me, but I find it difficult to articulate why. (I’d include a link, but I worry that it would run afoul of our prohibition on starting board wars.) ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/2 "2016-11-08T02:15:45Z")
SFAIK, a congressional committee approved (by vote of the committee) the text of an impeachment resolution referring to Nixon, but (because of Nixon’s intervening resignation) that resolution was never voted upon by the House of Representatives. Nixon was therefore never impeached. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/3 "2016-11-08T02:33:07Z")
Impeachment is defined as removal from office. I can’t imagine the House trying to impeach someone not in office. I can’t imagine what that person would do except to laugh at them. Along with the rest of the country. The Nixon example shows that impeachment stops when a person is no longer in office. The House Judiciary Committee approved articles of impeachment but they never went to the full House because he resigned. It shows the exact opposite of what your disagreeable fellow intended. In short, this is sheer nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/4 "2016-11-08T02:33:31Z")
Any report, including the report on articles of impeachment, can be entered in the Congressional Record by a committee to create a final permanent record of its work. \*\*It does not become by this something adopted by the Congress. \*\*Nixon was **never** impeached. At all. Clinton and Andrew Johnson were impeached, and prevailed. Text of the Constitution: > [@](#): > > The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and Misdemeanors. You have to BE a civil officer of the United States to be impeached. You cannot impeach a private citizen. By resigning first Nixon made it _moot_ to proceed. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/5 "2016-11-08T02:37:31Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **Exapno** : > > Impeachment is defined as removal from office. That must come as a surprise to Bill Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/6 "2016-11-08T02:41:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That must come as a surprise to Bill Clinton. He would have been removed if he had been found guilty by the Senate. Impeachment is just the first part of the process. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/7 "2016-11-08T03:58:16Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That must come as a surprise to Bill Clinton. You’re right. I was using “impeachment” as a shortening of the “impeachment process” which includes impeachment and a vote finding guilt. That’s common usage, and it was the OP’s usage, but it can be nitpicked. That’s what the Dope is for. Just like it’s for calling conspiracy idiots idiots. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/8 "2016-11-08T08:22:24Z")
> [@Ace309](#): > > On an imgur thread this morning, a disagreeable fellow posited the following: > > 1. Congress has the power to impeach individuals who are not currently in office. Congress is not currently in session, so they can’t impeach anyone. (They’re all out campaigning.) ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 9:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/9 "2016-11-08T09:39:02Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > Congress is not currently in session, so they can’t impeach anyone. (They’re all out campaigning.) While it’s true that the House is not in session and will reconvene on Nov 14, 2016 at 2:00pm, the Senate was called to order by Acting President pro tempore the Honorable DAVID PERDUE, a Senator from the State of Georgia, on November 7, 2016 at 10:30 and 1 second a.m. At 10:30 and 28 seconds a.m. it adjourned until Thursday, November 10, 2016, at 10 a.m. The Republicans really don’t want to take a chance on President Obama making any recess appointments. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/10 "2016-11-08T11:47:06Z")
Grant’s Secretary of War, William Belknap, was impeached for corruption and quickly resigned, but the Senate went on with the “trial” anyway. He was “acquitted” when a majority of Senators thought the process was moot, despite the minority that wanted to formally disqualify him from future office. Judge Alcee Hastings was “convicted” (corruption again) and removed from the bench, but not disqualified in consideration of the inconvenient fact that he had been acquitted at his criminal trial (the key witness clammed up). He played the race card and got elected to Congress. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/11 "2016-11-08T17:15:09Z")
My understanding is that the President is (kinda sorta) the Chief Criminal Prosecutor of the USA … so we have a situation where the President is asked to prosecute himself/herself … non-ideal to say the least … so we have the alternate process of impeachment and removal from office … then the _next_ President can prosecute … Although this removal from office was rendered moot with Nixon’s resignation … President Ford still had to issue a pardon to make to whole affair moot … Nixon could still have been brought to trial even after he resigned … although I will not speculate on what would have happened in court … ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/12 "2016-11-08T17:39:32Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > My understanding is that the President is (kinda sorta) the Chief Criminal Prosecutor of the USA … so we have a situation where the President is asked to prosecute himself/herself Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. It is part of the checks and balances between the three branches of government and should only be viewed in that light. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/13 "2016-11-08T18:27:26Z")
The point of impeachment is that you cannot rely on the regular judiciary system to successfully prosecute the holders of high office who appoint the judiciary (not to mention the judiciary themselves). So those office holders are subject to a different system to everyone else: impeachment. No one who is not a high office holder is subject to impeachment, and I imagine it would be very unconstitutional to do so (it would smack of the [star chamber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber) which the constitution was very much intended to prevent) ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/14 "2016-11-08T19:10:18Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > You have to BE a civil officer of the United States to be impeached. You cannot impeach a private citizen. By resigning first Nixon made it _moot_ to proceed. Did you italicize moot there to mean that you don’t know what the word means? By resigning first, Nixon made it irrelevant to proceed. There was no point to be debated thereafter. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historically-does-impeachment-power-extend-to-people-who-may-hold-office/771040/15 "2016-11-08T19:17:40Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > My understanding is that the President is (kinda sorta) the Chief Criminal Prosecutor of the USA … No, not really. Not even if you consider the President the head of the executive branch and that the DoJ is part of it.