NCJ Number
143659
Journal
Maryland Law Review Volume: 52 Issue: 2 Dated: (1993) Pages: 437-457
Date Published
1993
Length
21 pages
Annotation
This article examines whether or not the framers of the U.S. Constitution intended that the impeachment of a Federal public official should be considered a criminal proceeding subject to all the constitutional guarantees for such a proceeding.
Abstract
The study focuses on the debate on the floor of the U.S. Senate of the Fifth Congress in 1798 in association with impeachment proceedings against Senator William Blount of Tennessee. The debate was occasioned by Virginia Senator Henry Tazewell's motion that the Senate call a jury to hear the case, based on the right to trial by jury in a criminal proceeding. The debate included several members of the Constitutional Convention, both as Senators and commentators. Other participants included Senators who had served in the First Congress, which approved the Bill of Rights in its final form. Thus, this debate provides an accurate account of the framers' original intent regarding the role of the Bill of Rights' criminal procedural guarantees in the impeachment process. All participants in the debate who were involved in the framing of the Constitution, as well as the Senate as a whole, determined without qualification that impeachment is not a criminal process and is thus not subject to constitutional criminal provisions. The Senate, however, is free to decide that such provisions should apply to impeachment, because each house of Congress determines its rules of proceedings. The Senate, however, is not bound by the U.S. Constitution to apply criminal procedural guarantees to impeachment proceedings. 118 footnotes