No, impeachment is a legislative process to remove someone from office who does something the legislature does not like. We’ve gone over this like forty thousand times in GQ.
Articles of impeachment are arbitrary. They are not indictments under any criminal code. The definition of the charges, rules of evidence, and burden of proof are made up by the chamber(s) trying the charges. The punishment is removal from office, not jail, fines, probation, or anything else that would normally be a punishment for a crime. And impeachment does not preclude further criminal prosecution of the offender by the judicial system, if warranted.
In fact Clinton was never convicted of perjury; he was issued with a civil contempt citation, and settled with the Arkansas bar for a five year suspension.
I don’t know about Illinois specifically, but this isn’t universally true at the state level. Some states have impeachment trials in court rather than in the legislature.
No it is not. Neither the state legislature nor the city council can impeach the mayor of Chicago. And there is no provision for a recall election.
If you google the subject, you’ll find that a lot of slacktivists are posting internet petitions demanding impeachment. This is part of the reason why these people never accomplish anything.
You’ll also find claims that the legislature couldn’t impeach Governor Blagojevich and that the law had to be changed to enable this. These, too, are absolutely false. The legislature can impeach state executive and judicial officials and has had this power since the constitution was adopted. Blagojevich was impeached and removed from office in 2009. In 2010, a constitutional amendment was put before the voters that would allow a governor (and only a governor) to be recalled by the voters. The amendment had nothing to do with impeachment.
Also notice, that there is no mention of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The House has the sole power to determine if there is a cause for impeachment.
And, again, this does not apply to municipal officials.
A few years ago Rob Ford, former mayor of Toronto, was caught cavorting with the criminals who supplied him with crack/cocaine when one wanted to sell a cell phone video to the media. He was called to resign by everyone; however, despite being lampooned by every satirist on the planet and being stripped of all his powers by municipal legislators…he still went to city hall and collected his pay checks.
Like Ford, I have no doubt that Rahm Emanuel is ‘in it for the long haul.’ He’s already offered up a sacrificial lamb (the Police Chief) and Anita Alvarez is also most likely not going to keep her job. Rahm might fall like Alvarez, but it won’t be by his own hand.
And re-elected, albeit in one closer than many had expected.
Rahm is symbolic to some progressives: a centrist considered too close to business interests. Thus his winning elections was his being appointed. The last election went into a run-off between him and Jesus “Chuy” Garcia with national progressive interests weighing in trying to make it a referendum on the future of the party.
Chuy lost however and to no small degree because he was unable to get most Blacks (or Black political leadership) to support him.
Hence the charge that the video had been suppressed during the election cycle as its political impact might have been significant.
Meanwhile the problems of the Chicago PD, hell of police departments country-wide, do not fall on any individuals alone. Rahm however needs to catalyze the systemic changes needed and to report on progress at regular intervals; he needs to acknowledge the problem exists and work on fixing it.
In all states I’m aware of, municipalities are creations of state law, so, unless there’s something specific in the Illinois Constitution, there’s nothing stopping the Illinois legislature from enacting a law allowing municipal officials to be impeached, put through a recall election or otherwise removed.
Whenever you think of an elected official resigning or being impeached, particularly a Chicago Democrat, just think of Bill Clinton, and you have your answer.
Yes, but impeachment usually follows conviction for illegal activity. Recall, on the other hand, usually happens when people are just pissed off about high-handed doings.