NCJ Number
117763
Journal
Judicature Volume: 72 Issue: 6 Dated: (April-May 1989) Pages: 359-365
Date Published
1989
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This panel discussion by judges and academicians attending the American Judicature Society meeting in February 1989 focuses on the history of the Federal judicial impeachment process, how the framers of the Constitution intended for the process to work, how the process has worked in the past, and arguments for and against change.
Abstract
The discussion explored Articles II and III of the Constitution. One panelist noted that criminal trials of Federal judges have occurred very rarely. The historical evidence surrounding the development of the Constitution indicates that the framers wanted to make sure that judges were independent by providing that they could be removed only on conviction for various crimes. However, the definition of an impeachable offense is left to the House of Representatives and the Senate. Thus, most commentators usually conclude that any impeachment proceeding is a political question. Proponents of changing the impeachment system point to the costs involved, the demands on senators' time, and the fairness of a simplified process like that used in the trial of Judge Harry Claiborne in 1986. Opponents of change argue that change is not needed, because the process is rarely used, and that impeachment is the only constitutionally allowable method of removing Federal judges. Photographs.