• Home
  • Mission of This Site
  • Contact

Impeachable Offenses?

~ The Use & Abuse of Impeachment in the 21st Century

Impeachable Offenses?

Category Archives: Uncategorized

If Mueller Goes Down, State Attorneys General Won’t Save Us

25 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

attorney general, immunity, Mueller, quo warranto, self-pardon, Shugerman, state attorneys general, supremacy, supremacy clause

Several recent articles have suggested that, should Special Counsel Robert Mueller be fired and his investigation discontinued, state attorneys general could, in effect, step into his shoes.  While state officials can play some role in what might broadly be termed the anti-Trump resistance, I do not believe they can function effectively as stand-in special prosecutors.

I lay out my reasons for this view in an article published today in Slate.  You can read the article at this link.

I’ll be writing a bit more on this subject, and reader reactions to the Slate piece, in coming days.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Wall Street Journal Considers Presidential Self-Pardons … with a little help from “Impeachable Offenses”

25 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

grand jury, Mueller, pardon, runaway grand jury, self-pardon

The following article examining the president’s power of self-pardon and other tactics Mr. Trump might employ to stymie the Mueller investigation appeared yesterday in the Wall Street Journal.  We are pleased to note that it quotes Professor Bowman at length and gives a shout-out to this blog.  The WSJ article can also be found at this link.

Presidential Self-Pardon Remains a Murky Issue: 
Constitutional scholars say matter is unresolved
Special counsel Robert Mueller departing after briefing members of the Senate last month on his investigation into potential collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.
Special counsel Robert Mueller departing after briefing members of the Senate last month on his investigation into potential collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. PHOTO: JOSHUA ROBERTS/REUTERS

By

Jess Bravin

July 24, 2017 5:23 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—In 1974, some of President Richard Nixon’s lawyers advised the president that he could pardon himself. In 1992, the Iran-Contra special prosecutor reached the opposite conclusion regarding President George H.W. Bush.

Neither president took that step, and constitutional scholars say the question of the presidential self-pardon remains unresolved.

But the U.S. Constitution, unlike many state governments, centralizes prosecutorial authority under the president. That means he could forbid the Justice Department from investigating or pursuing criminal charges against anyone, including himself, so he may never reach the point of having to pardon himself.

The subject has come to the fore in recent days after reports emerged that President Donald Trump had asked his advisers about his ability to pardon various people, including himself.

Trump officials say the issue won’t come up because there was no wrongdoing.

“I’m not sure if he has the right to [pardon] himself or not,” White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci said Sunday on CNN. “But it doesn’t matter, anyway, because that is another one of those stupid hypotheticals. He’s not going to have to pardon himself, because he’s done absolutely nothing wrong.”

The president himself tweeted Saturday, “While all agree the U. S. President has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when only crime so far is LEAKS against us.FAKE NEWS.”

The Justice Department has taken the position that a president can’t be prosecuted. Past special prosecutors have disagreed.

“It is very likely that a president is subject to federal indictment. No one is above the law in this country,” says Ronald Rotunda, a law professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., who worked both for the Senate Watergate Committee and later Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel whose investigation of President Bill Clinton led to impeachment and acquittal.

Last week, the New York Times reported on a memo obtained under the Freedom of Information Act in which Mr. Rotunda advised Mr. Starr that the president was subject to indictment.

“I have thought about these issues for years, beginning with my work on the Watergate Committee,” Mr. Rotunda said. “Starr’s request for a legal opinion forced me to think about it more carefully and see what is most likely the law.”

But past special prosecutors such as Mr. Starr operated under broad statutory authority that since has expired. Under current law, special counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating alleged Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, only has the authority to recommend to higher-ups that indictments be sought, says Frank Bowman, a law professor at the University of Missouri who publishes the ImpeachableOffenses.net blog.

Even if Justice Department attorneys obtained an indictment before the president issued an order canceling the investigation—or defied such an order—Mr. Trump could replace hostile officials with those willing to follow his orders. And if a “runaway” federal grand jury voted for an indictment on its own, a prosecution couldn’t proceed without a signature from a Justice Department lawyer, Mr. Bowman says.

“The judge has no independent power to create a prosecutorial authority,” he says.

A president attempting to derail an investigation could wreak havoc with traditional concepts of law and order, legal experts say. Because he has the power to pardon anyone for a federal crime, with the possible exception of himself, a president could in theory pardon individuals for obstructing an investigation if the offense took place under federal jurisdiction—as is all of Washington, D.C.

But there’s a far easier course if Mr. Trump acts on his assertion that the investigation against him is an illegitimate “witch hunt”: He could fire Mr. Mueller.

“If Trump takes Mueller off the board, he can pretty much stop the whole thing,” Mr. Bowman says. At that point, the inquiry’s only avenue “probably rests on the midterm elections of 2018”—and whether the Democrats can seize a chamber of Congress, and with it the ability to pursue their own investigations.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Does Trump University Constitute an Impeachable Offense?

25 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by crosbysamuel in Articles, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

fraud, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, racketeering, trump university

In a draft for the upcoming University of Oregon Law Review, Professor Christopher L. Peterson explores whether the fraud and racketeering behind Trump University constitutes an offense which would enable Congress to pursue impeachment. Click here to read the article.

la-me-ln-trump-university-lawsuit-donald-trump-20160226.jpgBebeto Matthews / Associated Press

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Obstacles to the Pardon Power

24 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by crosbysamuel in Articles, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

pardon, pence, vice president

Click here to read about the various limitations on the President’s pardon power, and whether, should a self-pardon fail, the Vice President could pardon Trump instead.

170721_POL_Trumphandsup.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpgAlex Wong/Getty Images

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Political Consequences for Misuse of Pardon Power

23 Sunday Jul 2017

Posted by crosbysamuel in Articles, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Obstruction of Justice, pardon, prosecution

Click here to read about the potential political ramifications of President Trump using his pardon power to avoid prosecution.

170721_JURIS_Trump-PardonPower.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpgAlex Wong/Getty Images

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Prosecution by the States

22 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by crosbysamuel in Articles, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

attorneys general, firing, Mueller, pardon, state

Click here to read about the option of State Attorneys General to take up the investigation and possible prosecution of President Trump should he prove evasive on a federal level.

170721_JURIS_Schneiderman.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpgDrew Angerer/Getty Images

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Trump hints strongly at exercise of pardon power

22 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

obstruction, Obstruction of Justice, pardon, prospective pardon, self-pardon

In a series of tweets, Mr. Trump asserted that he has “complete pardon power,” although he did not say he intended to exercise that power immediately.  These remarks, combined with earlier reports that he has been consulting legal counsel about the extent of his power to pardon, certainly raise the prospect that he may seek to block the progress of the Mueller investigation by prospectively pardoning those who are its subjects, possibly including himself.

Should he do so, several issues alluded to previously here and in my recent Slate article will jump to the forefront: (1) whether a president can issue prospective pardons, i.e., can he pardon people for crimes with which they have not yet been charged; (2) whether a president can pardon himself; and (3) whether the use of the pardon power to block an investigation into wrongdoing by the president or his close associates would itself constitute either the crime of obstruction of justice or an impeachable offense.

The answer to the first question is probably yes.  At a minimum, we have the historical example of President Gerald Ford who pardoned his predecessor, the recently-resigned Richard Nixon, for criminal offenses he might have committed in connection with the Watergate scandal.

Whether a president can pardon himself is hotly contested, but if he can, the constitution expressly provides that such a pardon cannot extend to impeachment.

Whether an exercise of the pardon power to block an investigation could itself constitute a crime is a fascinating, but unresolved, question.  My own instinct is that it could be.  Merely because a government officer has the legal power to perform an act does not mean that the act is not criminal.  For example, a member of Congress has the undoubted power to vote for or against legislation, but if the member votes a particular way because she received a bribe to do so, that would be a crime.  Presidents are no different.

Finally, I find it almost inarguable that a corrupt exercise of the pardon power would constitute grounds for impeachment.  On this blog, we have not yet discussed what kinds of conduct can constitute an impeachable offense.  However, the undisputed core of impeachable behavior is misuse of presidential power.  The fact that the power in question is that of issuing pardons does not change this fundamental conclusion.

All these questions will be discussed on this site in greater detail presently.  In the meantime, I strongly recommend a fine new law review article by Professors Daniel Hemel and Eric Posner on presidential obstruction that covers in detail or touches on all of them. It can be downloaded at this link.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Does Mueller Matter? A Citizen’s Guide to the Obstacles Confronting the Special Counsel

19 Wednesday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Ethics in Government Act, Independent Counsel, Mueller, pardon, Rachel Brand, rosenstein, self-pardon, Special Counsel

Robert Mueller, appointed by the Department of Justice as special counsel to investigate the Trump campaign – Russia connection, is looking into whether any crimes have been committed by Mr. Trump, his family, or subordinates.  Many people may be hazy on what would happen if and when Mr. Mueller identifies one or more prosecutable offenses. I have put together an “informed citizen’s guide to the obstacles that stand between Mueller deciding that a crime was committed and either impeachment of President Trump or prosecution of any Trump-linked suspects.”  It was published in Slate yesterday at the link below.

Not So Fast Special Counsel: All the ways Robert Mueller’s investigation of Donald Trump might be tripped up before it reaches the finish line.

Readers might find it informative.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

The Republican Health Care Bill & Impeachment

18 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

health care, healthcare bill, midterm elections

The Republicans’ long crusade to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act may have died yesterday with the announcement that Senators Moran and Lee would vote against even bringing the current Senate bill to a vote.  The health care debate will continue because everyone agrees that the ACA has problems that need fixing, and some reparative legislation may ultimately emerge.  But the vision of President Trump, uncouth but mystically powerful, leading a Republican congress to an endless string of political victories like a modern Genghis Khan sweeping across the steppes at the head of his resistless Mongol hordes?  Well, that’s pretty much dead.

In its place is humiliation — undeniable failure by Republicans, in control of every lever of federal power, to accomplish the one thing they have, for seven long years, promised their most ardent followers.

Of course, the seeming collapse of “repeal and replace” is primarily due to the incoherence of Republican healthcare “thinking” in the Obama era. Universal, or even near-universal, access to healthcare can only be achieved through something like a single-payer, Medicare-for-all approach or a market-based, but government-subsidized, approach.  Republicans, from the Heritage Foundation to Mitt Romney, championed the latter approach … until President Obama adopted it, whereupon it became a despicable liberal plot. And thus, when charged with “fixing” what they decried as the “disaster” of Obamacare, Republicans had nowhere to turn.  They had only three choices – embracing the “socialist” heresy of single-payer, merely tweaking the market-based solution they had transformed into heresy, or stripping healthcare from millions of voting Americans. Faced with three intolerable choices, the Republicans choked and did nothing.

Despite their obvious failure, Republicans will not, cannot, readily admit that the central plank of their electoral platform for the last four election cycles is, and always was, bunk.  The blame for failure will have to be diverted elsewhere.  And Mr. Trump is a large, visible, and obvious target for blame.

Republican officeholders as a class have never been happy with Mr. Trump’s ascendance. He is not a “conservative,” as that term has come to be defined by the Republican intelligentsia.  He is not an evangelical Christian, even if some visible leaders of the political wing of evangelicalism have gulped hard and embraced him.  He is not really even a Republican, having chosen to run as one for purely opportunistic reasons.

Instead, for institutional Republicans, he is an accidental messiah, unlooked-for, fundamentally unwelcome, but offering in his tawdry, tweeting persona the prospect of transformational policy victories. “We’re gonna win so much you’re gonna get sick and tired of winning.”

What the healthcare debacle makes clear is that, in addition to his manifold personal deficiencies, Mr. Trump has no talent for crafting policy, jawboning legislative coalitions, or selling hard policy choices to the public.  Instead, his performance throughout this year’s healthcare debate has been vintage bad Trump — uninformed and essentially uninterested in the actual substance of legislation, alternatively blustering, threatening, or fawning, always preening and self-absorbed, wildly inconsistent, and ultimately petulant.  In the hard business of governance, he is anything but a “winner.”

So what has all this to do with impeachment?  Only this — regardless of all the endless debates on this blog and elsewhere about whether Mr. Trump has committed statutory crimes or impeachable offenses, he will not be impeached or removed from office unless a solid majority of the political class of both parties is convinced that his continued presence in office disserves the nation.

I emphasize “both parties” for two reasons, one mathematical and the other political.

The obvious point is that the Constitution requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives to approve an article of impeachment, and a two-thirds vote in the Senate for conviction and removal.  The Republicans now hold majorities in both houses and thus impeachment is impossible unless significant numbers of Republicans repudiate a president of their own party.  And liberals who dream of Trump’s removal need to remember that, even if (somewhat improbably) the results of the 2018 midterm elections were to give Democrats the House and a narrow majority of 51 in the Senate, not every House Democrat would be certain to vote for impeachment and the two-thirds threshold in the Senate would remain mathematically impossible without at least sixteen Republican votes.

The political point is that elected Republicans are – let’s be honest here – profoundly unlikely to abandon Mr. Trump at all, and certainly will not do so unless they become convinced that he is not merely a bad man, but a fatal impediment to Republican policy objectives and their personal political interests.  They may never reach that conclusion.

But Trump’s catastrophically inept performance in the healthcare debate may — and I emphasize may — be the first step toward a moment when, if presented with incontrovertible evidence that Mr. Trump has committed acts traditionally viewed as impeachable, Republicans will vote to rid themselves and the country of their accidental messiah.

 

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...

Debunking the claim that the Foreign Emoluments Clause doesn’t cover Presidents

18 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by impeachableoffenses in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

emoluments, foreign emoluments clause, Tillman

Several days ago, I wrote skeptically about the claim advanced by Seth Barrett Tillman and Joshua Blackman that the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution doesn’t cover Presidents.  The online magazine Slate has just published a more extensive, and in my view, dispositive critique of the Tillman-Blackman argument.  The article by Professors Gautham Rao and Jed Handelsman Shugerman, is accessible here, and well worth reading.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Blog Owner

Frank O. Bowman, III


Curators' Distinguished Professor Emeritus
Floyd R. Gibson Missouri Endowed Prof of Law Emeritus
Univ of Missouri School of Law

Web Profile

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Professor Bowman on Impeachment »

Bibliographies

Explore bibliographies categorized by author and subject, and find other resources.

Posts by Topic

  • The Case for Impeachment
  • Defining Impeachable Conduct
  • Impeachment on Foreign Policy Grounds
  • Impeachment for Unfitness
  • Obstruction of Justice
  • Abuse of Criminal Investigative Authority
  • Election Law Violations
  • Foreign Emoluments
  • Conspiracy to Defraud the   United States
  • Politics of Impeachment
  • Lying as an Impeachable Offense
  • Abuse of Pardon Power
  • Electoral College
  • House Impeachment Resolutions
  • The Logan Act
  • The Mueller Investigation
  • Impeachment of Missouri Governor Greitens
  • Historical Precedent for Impeachment
  • Messages from Professor Bowman

Student Contributors »

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Impeachable Offenses?
    • Join 199 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Impeachable Offenses?
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d