The issue of impeachment—with regard to members of both the Executive and Judicial Branch—is of increasing interest to the American public and the United States Congress. Unfortunately, much of the history of federal impeachments remains shrouded in mystery.
It is true that over the years several secondary sources have come to be considered “definitive” compilations of all federal impeachment activities through their dates of publication. It goes without saying, that these sources quickly become outdated. What is not so widely known is that many of these sources suffer from three additional problems. First, several of them do not contain primary source citations or contain such citations for only a portion of the impeachments they list. Second, several of the primary source citations are erroneous. Third, some are not truly exhaustive for the periods they cover.
The National Legal Foundation is seeking to remedy these problems. However, the process is an on-going one. Most obviously, new impeachments and impeachment investigations will need to be added. In addition, there may be even more impeachment resolutions and investigations that we have not yet found. In a few cases, we have not yet verified secondary sources’ primary source citations. Furthermore, it is possible that errors may have crept into our primary source citations just has they did in the compilations of other researchers.
Therefore, this Background Briefing will be re-issued periodically. We request that anyone knowing of impeachment resolutions or investigations not listed in this Briefing and anyone finding any errors would contact us with this information. Each version of this Briefing will be dated and upon receipt of the latest version, all earlier editions should be discarded to avoid confusion.
This Briefing does not contain any information on memorials or petitions calling for impeachment or impeachment investigations unless they resulted in further action. Memorials and petitions are of a different nature than the information we are tracking. For example, just within recent months, Congress has received approximately 27,000 petitions calling for the impeachment of District Judge John Nixon and approximately 36,000 petitions calling for the impeachment of District Judge Stewart Dalzell.
The officials listed below have had impeachment resolutions offered against them in the House of Representatives. The procedural history and the final disposition of the resolution is also provided. Citations are to the official record of debates in Congress except in those cases in which we are still trying to verify information in secondary sources or in which we cite to other official government documents. The four official publications recording the full debates of Congress are usually much more helpful than the Journals of the Senate and House of Representatives. These publications are: Annals of Congress (1789-1824); Register of Debates (1824-1837); Congressional Globe (1833-1873); and The Congressional Record (1873-Present).
Impeachment Efforts Against Legislative Branch Officials
William Blount, Senator
On July 3, 1797, President John Adams sent a confidential communication to the House detailing purported misconduct by Senator Blount. A five-member Select Committee was appointed to examine the material presented by President Adams and report its recommendations to the House. 7 Annals of Cong. 440-41 (1797).
The Select Committee recommended Senator Blount be impeached and on July 6, 1797, a resolution to impeach the senator was introduced. Id. at 448. The resolution was adopted July 7, 1797, and the next day a Select Committee was appointed to investigate Senator Blount and draft articles of impeachment. Id. at 459, 463-64. On July 8, 1797, the Senate voted to expel Senator Blount. Id. at 465.
On December 4, 1797, the Select Committee reported the findings of its investigation to the House. 7 Annals of Cong. 672 (1797). On January 25, 1798, the Select Committee submitted five articles of impeachment against the former Senator. Id. at 919. The articles were debated and agreed to on January 29, 1798. Id. at 947, 957. Managers to prosecute the impeachment were appointed on January 30 and 31, 1798. Id. at 953, 957. The articles of impeachment were then referred to the Senate on February 7, 1798. Id. at 969.
On December 26, 1798, Blount’s defense counsel argued the former Senator could not be impeached because members of the Legislative Branch are not “civil officers” within the meaning of the Impeachment clause and, therefore, are not subject to impeachment. Furthermore, Blount no longer held office. 9 Annals of Cong. 2490 (1798). On January 14, 1799, based on the defense counsel’s argument, the Senate acquitted Blount. Id. at 2648.
Congress has never again initiated impeachment proceedings against any member of the Legislative Branch.
Impeachment Efforts Against Executive Branch Officials
John Tyler, President
On January 10, 1842, Mr. Botts introduced an impeachment resolution against President Tyler. The House refused to either adopt the resolution or refer it to a Select Committee for investigation. Cong. Globe, 27th Cong., 3rd Sess. 144-46 (1842).
Andrew Johnson, President
On January 7, 1867, Mr. Loan offered an impeachment resolution against President Johnson. The resolution was referred to the Joint Committee on Reconstruction. Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 2nd Sess. 319 (1867). On that same day, two other resolutions were offered. Mr. Kelso offered an impeachment resolution. The disposition of the resolution was not concluded in the morning business so consideration was postponed. Id. at 320. Then Mr. Ashley offered the third resolution of the day. This one called upon the Judiciary Committee to investigate charges against President Johnson. This resolution was adopted. Id. at 320-21.
Mr. Kelso’s resolution to impeach was reconsidered by the House on January 14 and 28, 1867, before it was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further investigation on February 4, 1867. Id. at 443, 806-08, 991. On March 2, 1867, the Judiciary Committee informed the House that it would be unable to complete the investigation that session, but recommended the investigation continue in the next Congress. Id. at 1754-55.
On March 7, 1867, Mr. Ashley introduced a resolution to have the Judiciary Committee resume the investigation of President Johnson. Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 1st Sess. 18 (1867). The resolution was adopted by the House. Id.at 25. The Judiciary Committee submitted its report recommending impeachment of the President on November 25, 1867. Id. at 791. Minority reports were also filed and a resolution was introduced discharging the Judiciary Committee from further consideration of the matter. Id. at 792. The Committee’s recommendation was debated on December 7, 1867, but the House voted not to impeach. Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 2nd Sess. 68 (1867).
On February 21, 1868, Mr. Covode started the whole process over again by introducing another impeachment resolution against the President. This resolution was referred to the Committee on Reconstruction. Id. at 1329-30. The Committee on Reconstruction submitted its report recommending impeachment to the House on February 22, 1868. Id. at 1336. Debate on the matter concluded when the House adopted the impeachment resolution on February 24, 1868. Id. at 1336-69, 1382-1400. A Special Committee was then appointed to draft the articles of impeachment. Id. at 1402.
Ten articles were reported by the Special Committee on February 29, 1868, and nine were adopted by the House on March 2, 1868. Id. at 1542-43, 1616-18. Two additional articles, bringing the total to eleven, were adopted by the House on March 3, 1868. Id. at 1638-42. The Senate began the impeachment trial on March 5, 1868. Id. at 1671. On May 26, 1868, the Senate voted to acquit President Johnson on articles eleven, two, and three. The Senate then adjourned sine die. No further action was ever taken on the remaining articles. Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 2nd Sess. supplement, 412-415 (1868).
Henry A. Smythe, Collector, Port of New York
On March 22, 1867, three resolutions were introduced calling for various types of action against Henry Smythe. Mr. Hulburd introduced a resolution calling for the President to remove Smythe from office. Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 1st Sess. 282 (1867). Mr. Stevens offered an impeachment resolution against Smythe and called upon the Committee on Public Expenditures to draft articles of impeachment. Id. Finally, Mr. Shellaberger introduced a resolution requesting the Committee on Public Expenditures investigate Smythe’s conduct. Id. at 284.
On March 23, 1867, the House resumed debate over these three resolutions. A different resolution was ultimately adopted which did not call for Smythe’s impeachment, but rather his immediate removal from office by the President. A copy of the resolution was sent to the President. Id. at 289-90.
William E. West, American Consul at Dublin
On December 2, 1867, Mr. Robinson introduced a resolution to investigate William West. Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 2nd Sess. 3 (1867). The resolution was debated, then referred to the Foreign Relations Committee. Id. at 3-8.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Schuyler Colfax, Vice President
Vice President Colfax’s name surfaced during witness testimony in a House “investigation of charges of bribery in influencing members of the House of Representatives.” Under this cloud of suspicion, on February 20, 1873, Mr. Wood introduced a resolution to investigate the Vice President’s conduct. Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 3rd Sess. 1544 (1873). The House, however, refused to consider Mr. Wood’s resolution. Then a second resolution was introduced by Mr. Tyner, calling for a general investigation into the witness testimony to see if the conduct of any officer of the United States warranted impeachment. This resolution was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 1545.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
William Belknap, Secretary of War
On January 14, 1876, Mr. Morrison introduced a resolution calling for the Committee on Expenditures to investigate activities of several departments, including the War Department. The resolution was adopted. 4 Cong. Rec. 414 (1876). On March 2, 1876, the Committee on Expenditures submitted a report to the House recommending impeachment of Secretary Belknap. The committee report included an impeachment resolution. Id. at 1426.
On that same day, March 2, 1876, Secretary Belknap resigned from office and his resignation was accepted by the President. Id. at 1429. The House proceeded with its impeachment efforts by appointing the Judiciary Committee to draft articles of impeachment. On March 8, 1876, a resolution from the Judiciary Committee was introduced requesting the authority to gather more evidence against the former Secretary. Id. at 1564. The resolution was adopted. Id. at 1566. On April 3, 1876, the Judiciary Committee reported back five articles of impeachment which were subsequently adopted by the House. Id. at 2159, 2161.
On April 5, 1876, the Senate began consideration of the impeachment articles. Id. at 2215. The impeachment trial concluded on August 1, 1876, when the Senate voted to acquit the former Secretary on all five articles. 4 Cong. Rec. app. 342-57 (1876).
H. Snowden Marshall, U.S. District Attorney, Southern District of New York
On December 14, 1915, Mr. Buchanan offered impeachment charges against Marshall. The charges were referred to the Judiciary Committee. 53 Cong. Rec. 240 (1915). On January 11, 1916, after no action was taken, Mr. Buchanan introduced a resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to investigate Marshall. Id. at 913. However, after some debate over the proper procedure, Mr. Buchanan withdrew the resolution from consideration. Id. at 918.
On January 12, 1916, Mr. Buchanan again offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 90, to investigate Marshall. This time the resolution was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. Id. at 962-71.
On January 27, 1916, the House passed a resolution, H.R. Res. 110, granting the Judiciary Committee authority to subpoena witnesses and to use a Subcommittee. Id. at 1658-59. On January 31, 1916, a Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee was organized to take testimony. The Judiciary Committee reported its findings, H.R. Rep. No. 64-494, to the House on April 5, 1916. The Judiciary Committee recommended a Select Committee be appointed to further investigate Marshall. Mr. Kitchins offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 193, to adopt the Judiciary Committee’s recommendations. The resolution passed and the Select Committee was formed. Id. at 5540-41.
The Select Committee report was read into the record on April 14, 1916. Id. at 6135. The report found Marshall guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House and in contempt of the House of Representatives and recommended he be brought to the bar of the House to answer the charges. Id. at 6141.
On June 20, 1916, a resolution, H.R. Res. 268, was submitted which charged Marshall with violating the privileges of the House of Representatives and calling the Speaker to issue a warrant for Marshall’s arrest. Id. at 9638. The resolution was adopted. Id. at 9670. On June 22, 1916, the Speaker signed the warrant. Id. at 9792.
When Marshall was arrested by the Sergeant at Arms on June 26, 1916, he served the Sergeant at Arms with a writ of habeas corpus. Id. at 10,371. Marshall’s writ eventually went to the United States Supreme Court where Chief Justice White issued the opinion of the court on April 23, 1917. The Court granted the writ and released Marshall from custody. Marshall v. Gordon, 243 U.S. 521 (1916).
The Judiciary Committee submitted its last report, H.R. Rep. 64-1077, concerning impeachment efforts against Marshall on August 4, 1916. The report was referred to the House calendar. Id. at 12,096.
No record of any further action against Marshall has been found in primary or secondary sources.
W. P. G. Harding, Governor, Federal Reserve Board (FRB)
Paul M. Warburg, Vice Governor, FRB
Frederick Delano, Adolph Miller, and Charles Hamlin, Members, FRB
On February 12, 1917, Mr. Lindbergh offered articles of impeachment against five members of the Federal Reserve Board. The articles were referred to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. 54 Cong. Rec. 3126 (1917). On March 3, 1917, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. 64-1628, finding insufficient evidence to support impeachment. The committee report was adopted. No further action was taken. Id. at 4953.
Harry M. Daugherty, Attorney General
On September 11, 1922, Mr. Keller introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 425, to investigate Attorney General Daugherty. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. 62 Cong. Rec. 12,346 (1922). On December 4, 1922, a resolution, H.R. Res. 461, was adopted authorizing the Judiciary Committee to conduct hearings. 64 Cong. Rec. 18 (1922).
The Judiciary report, which found insufficient evidence to impeach, was submitted to the House and referred to the House calendar on January 10, 1923. Id. at 1536. On January 25, 1923, the Judiciary Committee report was debated and a resolution discharging the Judiciary Committee from further consideration of the matter was proposed. Id. at 2410-52. Mr. Thomas offered an amendment to the resolution that would have forced another investigation by a Special Committee appointed by the Speaker of the House. Id. at 2415. Mr. Thomas’ amendment failed. The resolution discharging the Judiciary Committee from further action was adopted. Id. at 2450-52. No further action was taken.
Clarence Chase, Collector of Customs, Port of El Paso, Texas
Chase was implicated in a Senate hearing before the Committee of Public Lands and Surveys as part of the Tea Pot Dome investigations. The Senate, on March 25, 1924, adopted a resolution, S. Res. 195, referring the matter to the House of Representatives for such proceedings as might be appropriate against Chase. 65 Cong. Rec. 4915 (1924). The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 4992. On March 26, 1924, Clarence Chase resigned from office, and no further action was taken by the House. Id. at 5009.
Fredrick Fenning, Commissioner, District of Columbia
On April 19, 1926, articles of impeachment against Commissioner Fenning were read on the floor of the House, and a resolution, H.R. Res. 228, to investigate the validity of the charges was adopted. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 67 Cong. Rec. 7753, 7814 (1926). On May 4, 1926, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 69-1075, recommending a complete investigation. 67 Cong. Rec. 8718 (1926). A resolution adopting the committee report was passed by the House on May 6, 1926. Id. at 8822-28.
On June 9, 1926, Mr. Rankin submitted a brief to the investigating committee supporting Fenning’s impeachment. Id. at 11,019. Then on June 16, 1926, after Fenning answered the charges, Mr. Rankin submitted a reply brief. Id.at 11,374.
Two committees were involved in the impeachment investigation of Fenning. A preliminary report of a Special Subcommittee of the Committee on the District of Columbia was submitted to the House on June 30, 1926. Id. at 12,397. Then on July 1, 1926, the final Judiciary Committee report, H.R. Rep. No. 69-1590, was submitted to the House and later referred to the House calendar. Id. at 12,593, 12,858.
No record of any further action against Commissioner Fenning has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Andrew W. Mellon, Treasury Secretary
On January 6, 1932, Mr. Patman introduced an impeachment resolution against Secretary Mellon. 75 Cong. Rec. 1400 (1932). The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 1401.
On February 13, 1932, the Judiciary Committee discontinued its investigation of Secretary Mellon due to his resignation from office. The Judiciary Committee neither recommended impeachment to the House nor drafted articles of impeachment against Secretary Mellon. Id. at 3850.
Herbert Hoover, President
On December 13, 1932, Mr. McFadden introduced an impeachment resolution against President Hoover. 76 Cong. Rec. 399 (1932). The resolution was tabled. Id. at 402.
On January 17, 1933, Mr. McFadden again introduced a resolution to impeach President Hoover. Id. at 1965. Again, the resolution was tabled. Id. at 1968.
William Woodin, Treasury Secretary
Twenty-Four Other Officials
On May 23, 1933, Mr. McFadden introduced an impeachment resolution against twenty-five government officials associated with the Federal Reserve Board and government finance. These individuals included: William Woodin (Secretary of the Treasury); two former Treasury Secretaries (Andrew Mellon and Ogden Mills); J. F. T. O’Connor (Comptroller of Currency); John Pole (Former Comptroller of Currency); four members and three former members of the Federal Reserve Board; twelve Federal Reserve Agents; and one former Federal Reserve Agent. 77 Cong. Rec. 4055 (1933).
Mr. Byrns raised a constitutional question of proper subject matter, since many of the individuals named in the resolution no longer held office. The resolution and the constitutional question were referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 4058.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Francis Perkins, Labor Secretary
James Houghteling, Immigration and Naturalization Commissioner
Gerard Reilly, Solicitor of the Department of Labor
On January 24, 1939, Mr. Thomas offered an impeachment resolution against these three federal officials. 84 Cong. Rec. 702 (1939). The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 711.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Harry Truman, President
On April 23, 1952, Mr. Bender introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 607, against President Truman. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 98 Cong. Rec. 4325 (1952).
On April 28, 1952, Mr. Schafer introduced a second impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 614, against President Truman. Id. at 4518. This resolution was also referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 4539.
On June 17, 1952, after becoming frustrated at the inaction on his impeachment resolution, Mr. Shafer filed a discharge petition to force his resolution, H.R. Res. 614, to be reported out of the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 7424. The petition failed to gather the necessary signatures. Lewis Deschler, Precedents of the U. S. House of Representatives, H.R. Doc. No. 94-661, at 603 (1977).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Spiro Agnew, Vice President
On September 15, 1973, Spiro Agnew, in a letter to the House of Representatives, requested an official investigation into the charges which had been made against him during an investigation by the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland. 119 Cong. Rec. 31,368 (1973).
On September 26, 1973, the House took up debate on Vice President Agnew’s request. Id. at 31,453, 31,478, 31,480, 31,490, 31,492, 31,503. Mr. Findley offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 569, appointing a Select Committee to investigate the Vice President. The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. Id. at 31,506.
On October 1, 1973, when it appeared no action would be taken on his previous resolution, Mr. Findley offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 572, directing the Attorney General to provide the House with information regarding the misconduct of Vice President Agnew. This resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 32,095-96, 32,131.
Following Vice President Agnew’s resignation, on October 10, 1973, by unanimous consent of the House, the Judiciary Committee was discharged from further investigation under House Resolution 572, and the resolution was tabled. Id. at 33,687.
Richard Nixon, President
On May 9, 1972, Mr. Ryan submitted a resolution, H.R. Res. 975, to impeach President Nixon. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 118 Cong. Rec. 16,350 (1972). On May 10, 1972, Mr. Conyers introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 976, against President Nixon. This resolution was also referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 16,663. On May 18, 1972, Mr. Conyers introduced his second resolution, H.R. Res. 989, calling for President Nixon’s impeachment. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 18,078.
The next impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 513, was introduced on July 31, 1973, by Mr. Drinan. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 119 Cong. Rec. 27,062 (1973).
On October 23, 1973, a landslide of resolutions calling for impeachment, impeachment investigations, and the appointment of a special prosecutor were introduced against President Nixon. 119 Cong. Rec. 34,871-73 (1973). The introduction of these resolutions continued for several days. Generally, resolutions calling for impeachment or the approval of a special prosecutor were referred to the Judiciary Committee, while those calling for an impeachment investigation were referred to the Rules Committee. Id. Et passim.
On February 6, 1974, the House passed a resolution, H.R. Res. 803, giving the Judiciary Committee authority to investigate impeachment charges against President Nixon. 120 Cong. Rec. 2349-50, 2362-63 (1974).
On August 20, 1974, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 93-1305, to the House. The report recommended impeachment and included three articles for that purpose. 120 Cong. Rec. 29,219-361 (1974). The Committee had initially considered five articles of impeachment, but only three gained majority support. Id. at 29,305-06.
On that same day, August 20, 1974, the House passed a resolution, H.R. Res. 1333, formally receiving the committee report and taking note of Nixon’s resignation of April 9, 1974. Id. at 29,361-62. No further action was taken.
Richard Helms, Ambassador to Iran
On July 29, 1975, Mr. Drinan introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 647, against Ambassador Helms. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 121 Cong. Rec. 25,578, 25,599 (1975).
Mr. Drinan introduced another impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 1105, against Ambassador Helms on March 24, 1976. This resolution was also sent to the Judiciary Committee. 122 Cong. Rec. 7830 (1976).
No other record regarding the disposition of these resolutions has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, they died in committee.
Andrew Young, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
On October 3, 1977, Mr. McDonald introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 805, against Ambassador Young. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee for action. 123 Cong. Rec. 32,055 (1977).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Mr. McDonald waited until July 13, 1978, to offer a second impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 1267, against Ambassador Young. This time the resolution was tabled on the House floor. 124 Cong. Rec. 20,607-09 (1978).
Griffin Bell, Attorney General of the United States
On February 6, 1978, a resolution, H.R. Res. 1002, was introduced authorizing Judiciary Committee to investigate Attorney General Bell. The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. 124 Cong. Rec. 2428 (1978). Another resolution calling for an investigation, H.R. Res. 1025, was introduced by Mr. Crane on February 15, 1978. This resolution was also referred to the Rules Committee. Id. at 3486.
No other record regarding the disposition of these resolutions has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, they died in committee.
Paul Volcker, Chairman Federal Reserve Board
Federal Open Market Commission Members
According to Elizabeth Bazan, Paul Volcker, and several members of the Federal Open Market Commission had impeachment resolutions first introduced against them in 1983. Elizabeth B. Bazan, Impeachment: An Overview of Constitutional Provisions, Procedure, and Practice 11 (Congressional Research Service, 1995).
On March 7, 1985, Mr. Gonzalez introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 101, against Paul Volcker and ten other members of the Federal Open Market Commission. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 131 Cong. Rec. 5047 (1985).
Additionally, on March 7, 1985, Mr. Gonzalez introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 102, against Paul Volcker alone. This resolution was also referred to the Judiciary Committee. 131 Cong. Rec. 5047 (1985).
The impeachment resolutions against Paul Volcker and Federal Open Market Commission members in 1983 and 1985, were apparently referred by the Judiciary Committee to its Subcommittee on Monopolies and Commercial Law. Bazan, at 11.
No other record regarding the disposition of these resolutions has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, they died in committee.
Ronald Reagan, President
According to Elizabeth Bazan, the first attempt to impeach President Reagan came in 1983. Bazan, at 11.
On March 5, 1987, Mr. Gonzalez introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 111, to impeach President Reagan. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 133 Cong. Rec. 4899-900, 4918 (1987).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
George Bush, President
According to Elizabeth Bazan, there were two impeachment resolutions introduced against President Bush in 1991. Bazan, at 11. Only one of these resolutions was recorded.
On January 16, 1991, Mr. Gonzalez introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 34, to impeach President Bush. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 137 Cong. Rec. 1736 (1991).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
William Jefferson Clinton, President
On November 5, 1997, Mr. Barr introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 304, calling for the investigation of President Clinton. The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee for further action. 143 Cong. Rec. 10,105 (1997).
Impeachment Efforts Against Judicial Branch Members
George Turner, Territorial Judge, Northwest Territory
On May 10, 1796, the House received a report from the Attorney General on the conduct of Judge Turner. The report was referred to a Select Committee for further action. 5 Annals of Cong. 1338 (1796).
On February 16, 1797, Judge Turner requested that a hearing on any potential charges be conducted while he was in town. His request was not granted. 6 Annals of Cong. 2166 (1797). Then on February 27, 1797, Mr. Bradbury submitted the Select Committee report and a resolution recommending a hearing be held in the Northwest Territory. This resolution was tabled by the House. Id. at 2320.
No record of any further action against Judge Turner has been found in primary or secondary sources.
John Pickering, U.S. District Judge, District of New Hampshire
On February 4, 1803, the House received a report from President Jefferson regarding the conduct of Judge Pickering. 12 Annals of Cong. 460 (1803). A Select Committee was appointed to investigate the matter and submitted its report to the House on February 18, 1803. Id. at 544. On March 2, 1803, the House passed a resolution impeaching Judge Pickering. Id. at 641.
On October 20, 1803, the House appointed a Select Committee to draft articles of impeachment. 13 Annals of Cong. 380 (1803). The Select Committee submitted four articles of impeachment to the House on December 27, 1803. Id. at 790. On December 30, 1803, the articles were adopted. Id. at 795.
The Senate began the impeachment trial against Judge Pickering on January 4, 1804. Id. at 319. On March 12, 1804, the Senate convicted Judge Pickering on all four articles and removed him from office. Id. at 367-68.
Samuel Chase, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court
On January 5, 1804, a resolution was introduced appointing a Select Committee to investigate Justice Chase. 13 Annals of Cong. 806 (1804). The resolution was approved on January 7, 1804. Id. at 874-76. The Select Committee recommended impeachment in a report submitted to the House on March 6, 1804. Id. at 1093. On March 13, 1804, the report was approved and a Select Committee was appointed to draft the impeachment articles. Id. at 1182. The House adopted the Select Committee’s articles on March 26, 1804. Id. at 1237.
The articles were then referred to the Senate and the impeachment trial began. On March 1, 1805, the Senate acquitted Justice Chase of all articles. 14 Annals of Cong. 669 (1805).
Richard Peters, U.S. District Judge, District of Pennsylvania
On January 6, 1804, Judge Peters was added, by amendment, to a resolution calling for the investigation of Justice Chase. 13 Annals of Cong. 824 (1804). The resolution was adopted on January 7, 1804. Id. at 876.
The Select Committee, appointed to conduct the investigation, submitted its report to the House on March 6, 1804. Id. at 1093. The Select Committee report, exonerating Judge Peters of any wrongdoing, was adopted by the House on March 12, 1804. Id. at 1171, 1181.
Harry Innis, U.S. District Judge, District of Kentucky
On March 21, 1808, a resolution to investigate Judge Innis was introduced. The resolution was tabled. 18 Annals of Cong. 1858, 1860 (1808). On March 31, 1808, the resolution was reconsidered and adopted by the House. Id.at 1886.
A Select Committee was appointed to conduct the investigation. That Select Committee submitted its report, absolving Judge Innis of all wrongdoing, to the House on April 19, 1808. Id. at 2197-98. On April 20, 1804, the report was referred to the Committee of the Whole. Id. at 2247-50.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. It is likely no action was taken before the end of the Congressional session.
Peter Bruin, Presiding Judge, Mississippi Territory
On April 9, 1808, a resolution was introduced calling for the appointment of a Special Committee to prepare articles of impeachment against Judge Bruin. The resolution was tabled. 18 Annals of Cong. 2068-70 (1808). On April 18, 1808, the resolution was reconsidered and a Special Committee was appointed to investigate the Judge. Id. at 2189.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Harry Toulmin, Superior Court Judge, Washington District of Mississippi Territory
On December 19, 1811, as a result of an accusatory letter from Judge Toulmin’s district, a resolution was introduced to investigate the Judge’s conduct. The resolution was tabled. 23 Annals of Cong. 559 (1811). On December 21, 1811, the resolution was withdrawn, and the original accusatory letter of December 16, 1811, was referred to a Select Committee for further inquiry. Id. at 567.
On January 14, 1812, an attempt to disband the investigating Select Committee was voted down. Id. at 764-65. The Select Committee submitted a report absolving Judge Toulmin on May 22, 1812. The report was adopted by the House. 24 Annals of Cong. 1436 (1812).
Then on January 2, 1817, another letter was read before the House outlining charges of misconduct against Judge Toulmin. The letter was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further investigation. 30 Annals of Cong. 409 (1817). On February 27, 1817, the Judiciary Committee issued a report finding no evidence to support impeachment. The report was adopted by the House, and the Judiciary Committee was disbanded. Id. at 1038-39.
William P. Van Ness, U.S. District Judge, Southern District of New York
On April 10, 1818, a resolution was introduced requesting that a Special Committee be appointed to investigate Judge Van Ness. The resolution was adopted by the House. 32 Annals of Cong. 1715 (1818). On February 17, 1819, the Special Committee submitted a report to the House recommending no action be taken against Judge Van Ness. 34 Annals of Cong. 1217-18 (1819).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the Congressional session.
Mathias B. Tallmadge, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of New York
On April 10, 1818, Judge Tallmadge was added to a resolution already adopted to investigate Judge William Van Ness. The House agreed to this amendment and appointed a Select Committee to conduct the investigation. 32 Annals of Cong. 1716 (1818). On February 17, 1819, the Select Committee submitted a report to the House recommending no action be taken against Judge Tallmadge. Id. at 1222.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the Congressional Session.
William Stevens, U.S. District Judge, District of Georgia
On April 10, 1818, a Special Committee was appointed to investigate Judge Stevens. 32 Annals of Cong. 1716 (1818). Judge Stevens resigned during the House investigation, and on November 24, 1818, the Special Committee was disbanded. 33 Annals of Cong. 313 (1818).
Charles Tait, U.S. District Judge, District of Alabama
On March 6, 1822, a complaint against Judge Tait was received by the House and referred to the Judiciary Committee. 38 Annals of Cong. 1213 (1822). A second complaint was presented on December 27, 1822. 40 Annals of Cong. 463-64 (1822). Mr. Moore then proposed a resolution referring the complaint to the Judiciary Committee for further action. Id. at 465. The resolution was adopted. Id. at 468. On January 28, 1823, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report exonerating Judge Tait. Id. at 715.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the Congressional Session.
On January 26, 1824, the House received another complaint against Judge Tait. This complaint was tabled. 41 Annals of Cong. 1202 (1824).
No record of any further action against Judge Tait has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Joseph L. Smith, Supreme Court Judge, Territory of Florida
On February 3, 1825, Mr. Call introduced a resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to investigate Judge Smith. The resolution was adopted. Reg. of Debates, 18th Cong., 2nd Sess. 438-40 (1825).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Buckner Thruston, U.S. Circuit Court Judge, District of Columbia
John Ness sent a memorial to Congress complaining of Judge Thruston’s official conduct. The memorial was referred to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. On February 28, 1825, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended no action be taken against the Judge. H.R. Rep. No. 18-85 (1825).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
On January 30, 1837, William Brent and Richard Coxe sent a memorial to Congress requesting an investigation of Judge Thruston. The memorial was referred to the Judiciary Committee. On March 3, 1837, the Judiciary Committee submitted its final report to the House. The report contained witness testimony, but no recommendation for or against impeachment. H.R. Rep. No. 24-327 (1837).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Alfred Conkling, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of New York
Martha Bradstreet sent a petition to Congress requesting an investigation of Judge Conkling. The petition was referred to the Judiciary Committee to conduct the investigation. On April 3, 1830, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended no action be taken against Judge Conkling. H.R. Rep. No. 21-342 (1830).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
A second set of complaints from citizens of New York was submitted to Congress and referred to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. On March 3, 1841, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended no action be taken against Judge Conkling. H.R. Rep. No. 26-244 (1841).
No other record has been found in primary or secondary sources regarding the disposition of this report. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
On August 8, 1848, a third memorial requesting an investigation was sent to Congress by Anson Little. The memorial was presented to the House on January 3, 1849, and referred to the Judiciary Committee for further investigation. On February 13, 1849, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended a full investigation of Judge Conkling be conducted by the next Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 30-103 (1849).
No other record has been found in primary or secondary sources regarding the disposition of this report. Presumably, no action was taken by the next Congress.
James H. Peck, U.S. District Judge, District of Missouri
On March 23, 1830, Mr. Buchanon presented a report from the Judiciary Committee recommending that Judge Peck be impeached. Reg. of Debates, 21st Cong., 1st Sess. 637 (1830). On April 21, 1830, debate on the Judiciary Committee report began in the House. Id. at 810. An impeachment resolution was adopted on April 24, 1830. Id. at 818-819.
On April 24, 1830, a Select Committee was formed to draft the articles of impeachment. Id. at 819. On April 29, 1830, the Select Committee submitted impeachment articles to the House. Id. at 863. On May 1, 1830, the House voted to adopt the articles as presented. Id. at 868-69. That same day, five managers were appointed to prosecute the impeachment before the Senate. Id. at 869.
On December 13, 1830, the Senate began the impeachment trial. Reg. of Debates, 21st Cong., 2nd Sess. 3-4 (1839). The trial continued through January 31, 1831, when the Senate voted to acquit Judge Peck. Id. at 45.
Benjamin Johnson, Superior Court Judge, Arkansas Territory
William Cummins sent a memorial to Congress requesting an investigation of Judge Johnson. The memorial was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. On February 8, 1833, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report found no evidence to support impeachment. The Judiciary Committee also concluded that a territorial judge was not a civil officer subject to impeachment. The Judiciary Committee recommended no further action be taken against Judge Johnson. H.R. Rep. No. 22-88 (1833).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Philip K. Lawrence, U.S. District Judge, Eastern District of Louisiana
On January 8, 1839, the House received a petition from Duncan Hennan requesting an investigation of Judge Lawrence. The petition was referred to a Select Committee for further action. H.R. Doc. No. 25-63 (1839). On February 11, 1839, the Select Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 272. The report recommended Judge Lawrence be impeached. Cong. Globe, 25th Cong., 3rd Sess. 187 (1839).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
John C. Watrous, U.S. District Judge, State of Texas
On Feb. 13, 1851, a memorial requesting an investigation of Judge Watrous was presented to Congress. The memorial was referred to the Judiciary Committee. On March 3, 1851, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration because insufficient time remained in the Congressional Session to complete the investigation. H.R. Rep. No. 31-70, at 1 (1851).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
A second memorial containing charges against Judge Watrous was sent to the House and referred to the Judiciary Committee. On February 28, 1853, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report to the House. The report recommended against impeaching the Judge.
H.R. Rep. No. 32-7, at 687 (1853).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the Congressional Session.
Another investigation of Judge Watrous was conducted in the 34th Congress. On February 9, 1857, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report recommending Judge Watrous be impeached. Cong. Globe, 34th Cong., 3rd Sess. 627 (1857). However, no further action was taken until January 15, 1858, when a resolution was introduced allowing the Judiciary Committee to further investigate the matter by calling witnesses. The resolution was adopted by the House. Cong. Globe, 35th Cong., 1st Sess. 304 (1858).
On December 9, 1858, the Judiciary Committee submitted two reports to the House. The majority report recommended Judge Watrous be impeached. The minority, however, found insufficient evidence to warrant impeachment. Cong. Globe, 35th Cong., 2nd Sess. 12 (1858). On December 15, 1858, the House adopted the minority report, finding insufficient evidence to justify impeachment. Id. at 102.
Thomas Irwin, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Pennsylvania
During the 35th Congress, 2nd Session, the Judiciary Committee conducted an investigation of Judge Irwin. On January 13, 1859, a resolution authorizing witnesses to be called was adopted by the House. Cong. Globe, 35th Cong., 2nd Sess. 360 (1859). On January 28, 1859, the Judiciary Committee informed the House that Judge Irwin had resigned, and the House voted to discharge the Judiciary Committee from further investigation. Id. at 656.
West H. Humphreys, U.S. District Judge, Eastern, Middle and Western Districts of Tennessee
On March 4, 1862, Mr. Bingham introduced a report from the Judiciary Committee recommending impeachment of Judge Humphreys. The report was recommitted to the Judiciary Committee. Cong. Globe, 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1062 (1862). On May 6, 1862, the report was resubmitted to the House. This time the House adopted the committee report and impeached the Judge. Id. at 1966.
On May 14, 1862, the House appointed a Select Committee to draft the articles of impeachment, and on May 19th the articles were adopted. Id. at 2134, 2205. The Senate began the impeachment trial on June 26, 1862, and later that day voted to convict and remove Judge Humphreys from office. Id. at 2942-53.
Mark H. Delahay, U.S. District Judge, District of Kansas
On February 28, 1873, Mr. Butler introduced a resolution to impeach Judge Delahay. The resolution was immediately adopted by the House. Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 3rd Sess. 1899-1900 (1873). On March 3, 1873, the Senate announced it was ready to receive the articles of impeachment. Id. at 2108. The Special Committee appointed to present the impeachment charges against the Judge then reported to the Senate and announced specific articles of impeachment would follow. Id. at 2122.
No record of any further action against Judge Delahay could be found in primary sources. The Judge apparently resigned after the House began impeachment proceedings, as evidenced by President Grant appointing another judge to his post on March 10, 1874. 3 Hinds’ Precedents of the House of Representatives of the United States § 2505, at 1010 (Government Printing Office, 1907).
Charles T. Sherman, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of Ohio
On February 22, 1873, Mr. Roberts introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Sherman. The resolution was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee. Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 3rd Sess. 1628 (1873). On March 3, 1873, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report recommending further investigation of Judge Sherman in the next Congress, and asking to be discharged from further consideration of the matter. Id. at 2122. Mr. Potter attempted to persuade the House to consider an impeachment resolution instead of the committee report, but his attempt failed. Id. at 2127. The committee report was adopted by the House.
No record of any further action against Sherman has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Richard Busteed, U.S. District Judge, District of Alabama
On December 15, 1873, Mr. E. R. Hoar introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Busteed’s conduct. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 1 Cong. Rec. 209 (1873). On December 17, 1873, the House passed a resolution granting subpoena power to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 266. On June 20, 1874, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report and resolutions for impeachment to the House. Id. at 5316.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
On January 7, 1875, sometime after Judge Busteed’s resignation, the House Judiciary Committee introduced a resolution calling for the Judge’s impeachment. The resolution did not pass. 3 Cong. Rec. 324-26 (1875).
Edward Durell, U.S. District Judge, District of Louisiana
On December 17, 1873, Mr. Wilson introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Durell. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 2 Cong. Rec. 266 (1873).
On January 7, 1875, following Judge Durell’s resignation, Mr. Wilson made a motion to table the resolution and relieve the Judiciary Committee of its investigation. His motion carried. 3 Cong. Rec. 319 (1875).
William F. Story, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Arkansas
On February 26, 1874, Mr. Blaine introduced charges against Judge Story. These charges were referred to the Judiciary Committee. 1 Cong. Rec. 1825 (1874).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Andrew Wylie, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
No record of any impeachment investigation against Judge Wylie has been found in primary sources. However, according to Joseph Borkin, Judge Wylie was investigated by the House during the 44th Congress, 1st Session. Joseph Borkin, The Corrupt Judge: An Inquiry into Bribery and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors in the Federal Courts 258 (Clarkson N. Potter, 1962).
D. C. Humphreys, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
No record of any impeachment investigation against Judge Humphreys has been found in primary sources. However, according to Joseph Borkin, Judge Humphreys was investigated by the House during the 44th Congress, 1st Session. Id.
Henry W. Blodgett, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of West Virginia
On January 7, 1879, Mr. Harrison offered a resolution to investigate Judge Blodgett. 8 Cong. Rec. 354 (1879). The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 355.
On March 3, 1879, the Judiciary Committee reported back to the House, recommending no impeachment proceedings against Judge Blodgett. Id. at 2388, 2390-95. A resolution to table actions against the Judge was introduced and adopted by the House. Id. at 2395.
Aleck Boarman, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Louisiana
On April 1, 1890, a resolution to impeach Judge Boarman was sent to the Judiciary Committee. No primary record of this resolution could be found. However, on February 17, 1891, the Judiciary Committee referred to this initial resolution when it introduced an impeachment resolution against the Judge. The House printed and recommitted the resolution to the Judiciary Committee. 22 Cong. Rec. 2797 (1890).
On February 19, 1891, the Judiciary Committee reintroduced a resolution to impeach Judge Boarman. The House agreed to consider the resolution on February 20th at 2:00 p.m. Id. at 2937. No such action was taken. So, on February 28, 1891, the resolution was again called up for consideration. The vote on the resolution was postponed until the evening session of the House. Id. at 3597. Again, the intended action did not occur.
On January 30, 1892, the old impeachment resolution was tabled and a new resolution calling for further investigation of Judge Boarman was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee. 23 Cong. Rec. 689 (1892). The Judiciary Committee reported back to the House on June 1, 1892. A resolution was passed discharging the Judiciary Committee from further action against the Judge, and the committee report and accompanying evidence was tabled. Id. at 4908.
James G. Jenkins, U.S. Circuit Court Judge, Seventh Circuit
On February 5, 1894, Mr. McGann introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Jenkins. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 26 Cong. Rec. 1922 (1894). On March 2, 1894, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report recommending an investigation of the Judge. Id. at 2533-34. On March 6, 1894, Mr. Boatner introduced a resolution to adopt the committee report and to begin the investigation. The resolution was adopted by the House. Id. at 2629.
On June 8, 1894, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report of the investigation to the House. The report was referred to the House calendar. Id. at 5994
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Augustus Ricks, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of Ohio
The Central Labor Union of Cleveland, Ohio, sent a memorial to Congress charging Judge Ricks with professional misconduct. The memorial was referred to the Judiciary Committee for a preliminary investigation of the charges. On August 8, 1894, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report recommending a full investigation of Judge Ricks be conducted. H.R. Rep. No. 53-1393 (1894).
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
On January 7, 1895, Mr. Johnson offered a resolution calling for an investigation into charges against Judge Ricks. The resolution was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee. 27 Cong. Rec. 709 (1895). The Judiciary Committee recommended impeachment and reported its findings to the House on January 25, 1895. The committee report was referred to the House calendar and ordered printed. Id. at 1360.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Charles H. Swayne, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of Florida
On December 10, 1903, Mr. Lamar presented a memorial from the Florida legislature requesting an investigation of Judge Swayne. 38 Cong. Rec. 95 (1903). The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 103. On March 25, 1904, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 1905, and a resolution, H.R. Res. 136, recommending impeachment of the Judge. Id. at 3732. On that same day, Mr. Palmer introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 274, against Judge Swayne. Mr. Palmer’s resolution was referred to the House calendar. Id. at 3733. Then on April 7, 1904, Mr. Palmer introduced a resolution to postpone consideration of House Resolution 274 until December 13, 1904, so the Judiciary Committee could further investigate Judge Swayne. The resolution was adopted. Id. at 4431-32.
On December 9, 1904, the Judiciary Committee again submitted a report recommending impeachment of Judge Swayne. The report and impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 274, were referred to the House calendar. 39 Cong. Rec. 114-15 (1904). On December 13, 1904, the impeachment resolution was considered by the House. Id. at 214. The resolution was finally adopted, and a Select Committee was appointed to draft the articles of impeachment. Id. at 248-49.
On January 10, 1905, the Select Committee reported twelve articles of impeachment to the House. Id. at 665-67. Debate on these articles began on January 12, 1905. Id. at 754. All twelve articles were finally adopted on January 18, 1905. Id. at 1055-58. The impeachment trial began in the Senate on January 24, 1905. Id. at 1281. It concluded on February 27, 1905, when the Senate voted to acquit Judge Swayne of all charges. Id. at 3468-72.
Lebbus R. Wilfley, Judge of the U.S. Court for China
On February 20, 1908, Mr. Waldo introduced articles of impeachment against Wilfley and proposed a resolution, H.R. Res. 257, to investigate the charges. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 42 Cong. Rec. 2269 (1908).
On May 8, 1908, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 60-1626, to the House recommending against impeachment. Id. at 5965.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Cornelius H. Hanford, U.S. Circuit Judge, Western District of Washington
On June 7, 1912, Mr. Berger introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Hanford. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 48 Cong. Rec. 7799 (1912). The Judiciary Committee reported back to the House, H.R. Rep. No. 62- 880, on June 13, 1912, and recommended the investigation proceed. The report was adopted. Id. at 8068-69.
The Judiciary Committee appointed a Subcommittee to conduct the investigation. On July 22, 1912, during the investigation, Judge Hanford tendered his resignation, and it was accepted. Id. at 10,308. The Subcommittee’s findings were submitted to the Judiciary Committee and a final committee report was drafted. This report, submitted to the House on August 6, 1912, recommended no further action against the former Judge. Id. at 10,308. In conjunction with this report, Mr. Clayton introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 672, discharging the Judiciary Committee from any further action against Judge Hanford. The resolution was adopted by the House. Id. at 10,308-09.
Robert Archbald, U.S. Circuit Judge, Third Circuit, Judge of U.S. Commerce Court
On April 23, 1912, Mr. Norris introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 511, to investigate Judge Archbald and requested any available information from the Justice Department be made available to the investigating committee. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 48 Cong. Rec. 5242 (1912). Two days later, on April 25, 1912, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 62-601, recommending the House adopt Mr. Norris’ resolution. The resolution was adopted. Id. at 5346.
On July 8, 1912, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report on its investigation of Judge Archbald, which included an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 524, and thirteen articles of impeachment. Id. at 8697-702. On July 11, 1912, the resolution and the articles of impeachment were debated, then adopted by the House. Id. at 8934.
On July 13, 1912, the House passed a resolution, H.R. Res. 628, announcing the impeachment of Judge Archbald and the selection of managers to prosecute the case before the Senate. Id. at 8989. The Senate impeachment trial began on July 16, 1912. Id. at 9117. It continued until January 13, 1913, when the Senate voted on the articles. Judge Archbald was removed from office after being found guilty of articles I, III, IV, V, and XIII. 49 Cong. Rec. 1438-48 (1913).
Emory Speer, U.S. District Judge, Southern District of Georgia
On August 26, 1913, Mr. Clayton offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 234, to investigate Judge Speer. 50 Cong. Rec. 3777 (1913). The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. Id. at 3795. However, following an objection from the floor, the resolution was held over for consideration until August 27, 1913, at which time it was amended and adopted. Id. at 3825.
A Select Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee conducted the investigation. On October 2, 1914, after reviewing the Subcommittee’s findings, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 63-1176, to the House. The report was referred to the House calendar. 51 Cong. Rec. 16,097 (1914). The report, which recommended no further action be taken against Judge Speer, was considered and agreed to by the House on October 21, 1914. Id. at 16,860.
Daniel Thew Wright, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
On March 21, 1914, Mr. Park introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 446, against Judge Wright. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 51 Cong. Rec. 5238 (1914). On April 10, 1914, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 63-514, to the House. The report recommended further investigation and authorized the Judiciary Committee to use Subcommittees as needed. The report was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. Id. at 6559-60.
On March 3, 1915, the House agreed with the Judiciary Committee’s final report H.R. Rep. No. 63-1191, recommending no further action, and discharged the Judiciary Committee from any further investigation of Judge Wright. 52 Cong. Rec. 5485 (1915).
Alston G. Dayton, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of West Virginia
On May 11, 1914, Mr. Neely introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 512, calling for the investigation of Judge Dayton. The resolution was sent to the Rules Committee. 51 Cong. Rec. 8417 (1914). On June 12, 1914, after no further action was taken, Mr. Neely introduced a second resolution, H.R. Res. 541, to investigate impeachment charges against the Judge. This resolution was also sent to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 10,327-28.
On February 9, 1915, the report, H.R. Rep. No. 63-1381, of a Select Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee was considered by the House. The House followed the report’s recommendation and adopted a resolution authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate the Judge. 52 Cong. Rec. 3447-48 (1915). The Judiciary Committee then submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 63-1490, to the House on March 3, 1915. The report, recommending no further action against Judge Dayton, was adopted. Id. at 5452-53.
Kennesaw Mountain Landis, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Div.
On February 2, 1921, Mr. Welty introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 665, to investigate the conduct of Judge Landis. The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. 60 Cong. Rec. 2478 (1921). On February 14, 1921, Mr. Welty introduced actual impeachment charges against Judge Landis. These charges were referred to the House Judiciary Committee for investigation. Id. at 3143.
On March 2, 1921, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No 66-1407, to the House, and it was referred to the House calendar. Id. at 4359. The report recommended a complete investigation be undertaken by the 67th Congress.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the Congressional Session. However, on October 17, 1921, Judge Landis was condemned for his actions in a letter from the American Bar Association. This condemnation letter was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. 61 Cong. Rec. 6357 (1921).
William E. Baker, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of West Virginia
On May 22, 1924, a resolution, H.R. Res. 325, to investigate Judge Baker was introduced. Some time earlier the Judiciary Committee had received information concerning misconduct by Judge Baker, and appointed a Subcommittee to review the material. After this review, the Subcommittee recommended a full-scale investigation. The resolution was adopted by the House and referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. 65 Cong. Rec. 9239-40 (1924).
A Select Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee was given charge of the investigation. (There is record of the Select Subcommittee obtaining funding for a stenographer on June 7, 1924. Id. at 11,252-53.) The final Judiciary Committee report, H.R. Rep. No. 68-1443, recommended against impeaching Judge Baker. The report by Mr. Dwyer was referred to the House Calendar on February 10, 1925. 66 Cong. Rec. 3471 (1925).
No other record concerning the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
George W. English, U.S. District Judge, Eastern District of Illinois
On January 13, 1925, Mr. Hawes introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 402, requesting the Judiciary Committee conduct an investigation of Judge English. The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. 66 Cong. Rec. 1790 (1925). Then on February 3, 1925, Mr. Snell made a motion to refer House Resolution 402 from the Rules Committee to the Judiciary Committee. The motion carried. Id. at 2940.
On February 10, 1925, Mr. Graham introduced a joint resolution, H.R.J. Res. 347, calling for an investigation of Judge English. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 3472. The resolution was signed by the President on March 4, 1925. Id. at 5531. A Special Committee, consisting of members of the House Judiciary Committee, was then appointed to conduct the investigation. On December 19, 1925, the Special Committee submitted its report. The report was subsequently referred to the Judiciary Committee, which continued the investigation. Judge English testified before the Judiciary Committee on January 12, 1926. See H.R. Rep. No. 69-653 at 67 Cong. Rec. 6652 (1926).
On March 25, 1926, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 69-653, and articles of impeachment against Judge English. 67 Cong. Rec. 6280-81 (1926). The next day a minority report was printed in the record. Id. at 6363-68. On March 30, 1926, the House began debate on the articles of impeachment. Id. at 6585. On April 1, 1926, the articles were adopted. Id. at 6736.
The Senate considered the articles of impeachment on April 23, 1926, and the impeachment trial began with Judge English’s answer to the articles on May 3, 1926. Id. at 8026, 8578. House managers then requested time to prepare a response to Judge English. On March 5, 1926, the Senate set November 10th as the date for the trial to resume. Id. at 8686, 8733.
On December 11, 1926, the House took note of Judge English’s resignation and requested the Senate drop the impeachment proceedings. 68 Cong. Rec. 302 (1926). The Senate accepted the House recommendation and ended the proceedings on December 13, 1926. Id. at 347-48.
Frank Cooper, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of New York
On January 28, 1927, Mr. LaGuardia brought impeachment charges against Judge Cooper. 68 Cong. Rec. 2487 (1927). The charges were referred to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. Id. at 2493. On March 2, 1927, the Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 69-2299, recommending no impeachment action be taken against the Judge. This report was referred to the House calendar, and the next day a resolution, H.R. Res. 450, adopting the committee report, was passed by the House. Id. at 5463, 5619.
Grover Moscowitz, U.S. District Judge, Eastern District of New York
On March 4, 1929, a joint resolution, H.R.J. Res. 431, calling for the investigation of Judge Moscowitz was signed by the President. 70 Cong. Rec. 5227 (1929). The resolution created a Select Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee to conduct the investigation. Id. at 4839. Following this investigation, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 70-1106, to the House criticizing Judge Moscowitz, but refused to recommend impeachment.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
According to Joseph Borkin, another resolution, H.R. Res. 330, to investigate Judge Moscowitz was adopted by the House and sent to the Judiciary Committee during the 74th Congress (1935). The Judiciary Committee apparently never acted on the resolution. Borkin, at 240.
Francis A. Winslow, U.S. District Judge, Southern District of New York
On April 15, 1929, Mr. LaGuardia introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 12, to investigate Judge Winslow. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 71 Cong. Rec. 33 (1929). On December 20, 1929, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 71-84, recommending the investigation cease due to Judge Winslow’s resignation. A resolution, H.R. Res. 110, adopting the committee’s report was passed by the House. 72 Cong. Rec. 1025-26 (1929).
Harry Anderson, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Tennessee
On March 12, 1930, Mr. LaGuardia introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 184, requesting that the Attorney General send the Judiciary Committee any available information on Judge Anderson’s conduct. 72 Cong. Rec. 5105-06 (1930). The resolution was sent to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 5141.
On June 2, 1930, a resolution from the Judiciary Committee, H.R. Res. 191, was introduced. The resolution called for a Special Committee, consisting of five members of the House Judiciary Committee, to be appointed to inquire into Judge Anderson’s conduct. The resolution was referred to the “Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union” and agreed to by the House on June 13, 1930. Id. at 9919, 10,649.
On February 18, 1931, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 71-2714, of their findings, and introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 362, stating insufficient grounds existed for impeachment. The resolution was adopted. 74 Cong. Rec. 5312-13 (1931).
Harold Louderback, U.S. District Judge, Northern District of California
On May 26, 1932, Mr. LaGuardia introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 239, requesting a Special Committee be appointed to investigate Judge Louderback. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. 75 Cong. Rec. 11,358 (1932). On May 31, 1932, the Judiciary Committee reported the resolution back to the House without amendment. Id. at 11,700. The resolution was adopted on June 9, 1932. Id. at 12,470.
A Special Committee was appointed to conduct the investigation and report its findings to the Judiciary Committee. On February 17, 1933, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report, H.R. Rep. No. 72-2065, and a resolution, H.R. Res. 387, requesting the report be adopted. 76 Cong. Rec. 4375-76 (1933). The report found insufficient evidence to warrant impeachment. Id. at 4913-14.
On February 24, 1933, when the Judiciary Committee report came up for consideration, Mr. LaGuardia introduced the minority report which recommended Judge Louderback be impeached and included five articles of impeachment. With two conflicting reports to consider, a debate arose in the House between those supporting the majority report’s recommendation not to impeach, and those supporting the five articles of impeachment presented in the minority report. When the debate was over, the House agreed to adopt the minority report and its articles of impeachment. Id. at 4913-25.
The Senate began its impeachment proceedings with Judge Louderback’s answer on April 11, 1933. 77 Cong. Rec. 1462 (1933). The actual impeachment trial started on May 15, 1933. Id. at 3394. On May 24, 1933, the Senate acquitted Judge Louderback on all charges. Id. at 4088.
James Lowell, U.S. District Judge, District of Massachusetts
On April 26, 1933, Mr. Smith introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 120, authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate Judge Lowell. The resolution was adopted. 77 Cong. Rec. 2415, 2421 (1933). On November 30, 1933, during the investigation, Judge Lowell died. On January 18, 1934, the Judiciary Committee introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 226, terminating the investigation. 78 Cong. Rec. 906 (1934). The resolution was adopted by the House on February 6, 1934. Id. at 2076.
James Wilkerson, Federal Judge, Chicago
On June 12, 1933, Mr. Cellers introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 145, to investigate the “matter of appointments, conduct, proceedings, and acts of receivers, trustees, and referees in bankruptcy.” The resolution was referred to the Rules Committee for further action. 77 Cong. Rec. 3502 (1933). On June 6, 1933, the Rules Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 203, recommending the Judiciary Committee conduct the investigation. Id. at 5136. The report was adopted by the House on June 12, 1933. Id. at 5798.
A Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee was appointed to handle the investigation. Judge Wilkerson’s conduct became a subject of their investigation. After reviewing the evidence the Subcommittee recommended against impeaching the Judge. (Reference to the above actions is found in a speech by Mr. Dirksen on May 7, 1935.) 79 Cong. Rec. 7085, 7087 (1935).
No record of any further action against Judge Wilkerson has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Judge Woodward, Federal Judge, Chicago
Judge Woodward’s conduct came to the attention of the Subcommittee conducting the bankruptcy investigation under House Resolution 145 (see James Wilkerson above). After reviewing the evidence the Subcommittee recommended against impeaching the Judge. (Reference to the above actions found in a speech by Mr. Dirksen on May 7, 1935). 79 Cong. Rec. 7083, 7087 (1935).
No record of any further action against Judge Woodward has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Judge Lindley, Federal Judge, Chicago
Judge Lindley’s conduct came to the attention of the Subcommittee conducting the bankruptcy investigation under House Resolution 145 (see James Wilkerson above). After reviewing the evidence the Subcommittee recommended against impeaching the Judge. (Reference to the above actions is found in a speech by Mr. Sabath on May 7, 1935.) 79 Cong. Rec. 7087 (1935).
No record of any further action against Judge Lindley has been found in primary or secondary sources.
Joseph Molyneaux, U.S. District Judge, District of Minnesota
On January 22, 1934, Mr. Shoemaker introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 233, authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate Judge Molyneaux. The resolution was adopted and referred to the Judiciary Committee. 78 Cong. Rec. 1099 (1934).
When no action was taken, Mr. Shoemaker introduced another resolution on April 20, 1934. This resolution contained impeachment charges against Judge Molyneaux, and was also referred to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 7060-80.
No other record regarding the disposition of these resolutions has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, they died in committee.
Samuel Alschuler, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Seventh District (at Chicago)
On May 7, 1935, Mr. Dirksen offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 214, to investigate impeachment charges against Judge Alschuler. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 79 Cong. Rec. 7081-89 (1935). On May 13, 1935, the House adopted a resolution, H.R. Res. 220, granting the Judiciary Committee authority to hold hearings. Id. at 7393.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Halsted L. Ritter, U.S. District Judge, Southern District of Florida
On February 20, 1936, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report to the House recommending Judge Ritter be impeached. 80 Cong. Rec. 2528 (1936). The House adopted an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 422, against Judge Ritter on March 2, 1936. Id. at 3393. On March 9, 1936, the Senate received notice of Judge Ritter’s impeachment, and the next day the articles were read into the Senate Record. Id. at 3423, 3485.
Judge Ritter presented his answer to the Senate on April 3, 1936. Id. at 4898. On April 6, 1936, the impeachment trial began. Id. at 4971. Eleven days later, the Senate voted to acquit Judge Ritter on the first six articles, but convicted him on the seventh article, and removed him from office. Id. at 5602.
Ferdinand A. Geiger, U.S. District Judge, Eastern District of Wisconsin
No record of any impeachment investigation against Judge Geiger has been found in primary sources. However, according to Joseph Borkin, the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on the official conduct of Judge Geiger during the 75th Congress. However, when Judge Geiger resigned in 1939, no further action was taken. Borkin, at 232.
John P. Nields, U.S. District Judge, District of Delaware
No record of any impeachment investigation against Judge Nields has been found in primary sources. However, according to Joseph Borkin, the House Judiciary Committee investigated Judge Nields’ conduct in May 1941, during 77th Congress, 1st Session. Neither the results of the investigation, nor charges against the Judge were ever reported. Judge Nields apparently retired in October 1941, and no further action was taken. Borkin, at 240.
Albert Johnson, U.S. District Judge, Middle District of Pennsylvania
On February 15, 1945, a resolution, H.R. Res. 138, authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate impeachment charges against Judge Johnson (and Judge Watson, see below) was adopted by the House. 91 Cong. Rec. 1171 (1945).
The investigation of Judge Johnson was conducted at both the committee and subcommittee level. (Referenced in a speech by Mr. Russell.) 92 Cong. Rec. 2382 (1945). On July 3, 1945, during the Judiciary Committee investigation, Judge Johnson resigned. Id. at 2376. On July 14, 1945, Judge Johnson was called to testify before the Judiciary Committee. Following a poor performance by the Judge during cross examination, Judge Johnson relinquished his retirement salary and withdrew as a witness. Id.
On February 25, 1946, the Judiciary Committee released its final report, H.R. Rep. No. 79-1639, on the investigation of Judge Johnson. The report was referred to the Whole House on the State of the Union. Id. at 1592. The report did not recommend impeachment. Id. at A665.
No other record concerning the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Albert Watson, U.S. District Judge, Middle District of Pennsylvania
On February 8, 1945, Mr. Summers introduced a resolution to investigate Judge Watson. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 91 Cong. Rec. 975 (1945). On February 15, 1945, a second resolution, H.R. Res. 138, authorizing the Judiciary Committee to investigate Judge Watson (and Judge Albert Johnson, see above), was introduced by Mr. Summers referred to the Judiciary for further action. Id. 1171. On February 23, 1945, the Judiciary Committee submitted a report requesting authorization for it or its Subcommittees to conduct a full investigation of Judge Watson. Id. at 1394.
On February 25, 1946, the Judiciary Committee released its final report, H.R. Rep. No. 79-1639, on the investigation of Judge Johnson. The report was referred to the Whole House on the State of the Union. Id. at 1592. The report did not recommend impeachment. Id. at A665.
No other record concerning the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
William O. Douglas, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court
On June 17, 1953, Mr. Wheeler introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 290, impeaching Justice Douglas. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee to investigate the charges. 99 Cong. Rec. 6760 (1953).
No other record of the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary sources.
However, according to the Congressional Quarterly Guide to the United States Supreme Court, on June 18, 1953, the Judiciary Committee appointed a Special Subcommittee to conduct the investigation. Then on July 7, 1953, the Judiciary Committee voted to table the resolution and no further action was taken. Congressional Quarterly Guide to US Supreme. Court, at 661 (Elder Witt ed., Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 2ed. 1990).
On April 15, 1970, Mr. Jacobs began a second attempt to impeach Justice Douglas. His resolution to impeach the Justice, H.R. Res. 920, was referred to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. 116 Cong. Rec. 11,942 (1970). The next day seven resolutions, H.R. Res. 922, 923, 924, 925, 926, 927, and 928, requesting an investigation of Justice Douglas were introduced on the floor of the House. All of the resolutions sought the creation of a Select Committee to conduct the investigation, and all were referred to the Rules Committee for further action. Id. at 12,130-31. On April 20, 1970, Mr. Wyman introduced resolution, H.R. Res. 936, to investigate Justice Douglas. This resolution was referred to the Rules Committee. Id at 12,464. On April 28, 1970, Mr. Gooding introduced resolution to investigate Justice Douglas. This resolution was also sent to the Rules Committee. Id. at 13,326.
On April 21, 1970, a Special Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee was appointed to conduct an investigation under House Resolution 920. The Special Subcommittee issued a progress report on June 20, 1970. See August 5, 1970, press release by the Special Subcommittee at 116 Cong. Rec. 27,673 (1970).
The final report of the Special Subcommittee found no cause for impeachment and recommended no further action be taken. Mr. Wyman criticized this report on December 17, 1970. Id. at 42,240. On December 21, 1970, Mr. Dennis, a member of the Judiciary Committee, criticized his Committee for refusing to even bring the Subcommittee report to a vote. Id. at 43,147-48.
No other record regarding the disposition of this report has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, no action was taken before the end of the congressional session.
Alfred Murrah, Chief Judge, Tenth Circuit
Stephen Chandler, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Oklahoma
Luther Bohanon, U.S. District Judge, Eastern, Northern and Western Districts of Oklahoma
On February 21, 1966, Mr. Gross requested an investigation of these three Oklahoma judges. 112 Cong. Rec. 3489-90 (1966). A resolution to investigate, H.R. Res. 739, was adopted the next day and sent to the Judiciary Committee for further action. Id. at 3653.
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
Frank J. Battist, U.S. District Judge, Ohio
On January 24, 1978, Mr. Ashbrook introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 966, against Judge Battisti. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 124 Cong. Rec. 545 (1978).
No other record regarding the disposition of this resolution has been found in primary or secondary sources. Presumably, it died in committee.
140 Federal Judges
In the mid 1970’s, a large group of federal judges challenged their lack of pay raises during a high inflationary period, making the argument that this amounted to a diminution in compensation as prohibited by the Constitution. Their lawsuit failed.
On March 2, 1976, Mr. Jacobs introduced an impeachment resolution against certain federal judges involved in the above mentioned dispute. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 122 Cong. Rec. 5029 (1976).
Mr. Jacobs introduced a second impeachment resolution against the same judges on April 8, 1976. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 122 Cong. Rec. 9987 (1976).
No other record regarding the disposition of these resolutions has been found in primary or secondary sources. It is likely they died in committee.
Harry E. Claiborne, U.S. District Judge, District of Nevada
On June 3, 1986, Mr. Rodino offered an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 461, against Judge Claiborne. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 132 Cong. Rec. 12,129 (1986). Mr. Sensenbrenner introduced a second impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 487, against Judge Claiborne on June 24, 1986. This resolution was also sent to the Judiciary Committee. Id. at 15,287.
The Judiciary Committee appointed its Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice to assist with the investigation. Conduct of Harry E. Claiborne: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Court, Civil Liberties and the Administration of Justice, 99th Cong. at 1 (1987). The Judiciary Committee reported its findings to the House on July 16, 1986, and the report, H.R. Rep. No. 99-688, was referred to the House calendar. Id. at 16,745.
On July 22, 1986, the committee report was debated in the House. The report included four articles of impeachment against Judge Claiborne. Mr. Rodino proposed a resolution adopting the report and impeaching the Judge. Id. 17,294-95. The resolution was adopted by the House. Id. at 17,305. Also on July 22, 1986, Mr. Rodino introduced a resolution, H.R. Res. 501, appointing managers for the Senate trial. This resolution was also adopted by the House. Id. at 17,306-07.
On October 9, 1986, the Senate concluded its trial and voted on the articles of impeachment. Judge Claiborne was convicted on all articles except Article III. Id. at 29,870-78.
Alcee L. Hastings, U.S. District Judge, Southern District of Florida
On March 23, 1987, Mr. Sensenbrenner introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 128, against Judge Hastings. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee. 133 Cong. Rec. 6514, 6522 (1987). On March 31, 1987, the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Criminal Justice met in executive session to discuss Judge Hastings’ impeachment inquiry. Id. at D215.
On July 7, 1988, the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice concluded its hearings on Judge Hastings’ impeachment. These hearings had been held periodically since May 18, 1988. Impeachment Inquiry: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice of the Committee of the Judiciary House of Representatives, 100th Cong., 2nd Sess. (1988). On August 1, 1988, the Judiciary Committee submitted its final report, H.R. Rep. No. 100-810, along with a resolution, H.R. Res. 499, impeaching Judge Hastings. The report and resolution were referred to the House calendar. 134 Cong. Rec. 19,696 (1988).
On August 3, 1988, the House considered and adopted the impeachment resolution and the seventeen articles of impeachment it included. Id. at 20,206-11. The Senate concluded its impeachment trial on October 20, 1989. Judge Hastings was removed from office after being found guilty of articles I, II, III, IV, V, VII, VIII, and IX. 135 Cong. Rec. 25,329-35 (1988).
Walter L. Nixon, Jr., U.S. District Judge, Southern District of Mississippi
On February 22, 1989, Mr. Brooks introduced an impeachment resolution, H.R. Res. 87, against Judge Nixon. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee for further action. 135 Cong. Rec. 2553 (1989). The Judiciary Committee appointed its Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights to conduct the preliminary investigation. On March 21, 1989, the Subcommittee recommended a full Committee investigation. Id. at D252.
The Judiciary Committee submitted its report, H.R. Rep. No. 101-36, to the House on April 25, 1989. The report included three articles of impeachment against Judge Nixon. On May 10, 1989, the House debated and adopted the articles of impeachment presented in the Judiciary Committee report. Id. at 7404, 8814-24.
Immediately after the resolution was passed on May 10, 1989, Mr. Brooks offered a resolution, H.R. Res. 150, appointing the managers to prosecute the impeachment before the Senate. Id. at 8824. A resolution amending the articles of impeachment, H.R. Res. 251, was offered and passed on October 2, 1989. Id. at 22,718, 22,726-27.
The Senate concluded its trial on November 3, 1989, and proceeded to a vote on the articles of impeachment. Judge Nixon was removed from office after being found guilty of articles I and II. Id. at 27,102-04.
© 2018 National Legal Foundation
