The essay deals with the instrument of impeachment in den United States of America. Inspired by the recently debated impeachment trial against President Trump, the author establishes a critical perspective on the aforesaid legal instrument. After giving an overview of the historical roots of impeachment, the exact procedure and its problems are discussed. Concluding, the author proposes an alternative concept which may be able to retrieve the instrument of impeachment out of the ivory tower.
Der Autor beschäftigt sich im vorliegenden Werk mit dem Amtsenthebungsverfahren in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika. Die hochaktuelle Thematik wird - inspiriert durch den Impeachment-Prozess gegen US-Präsident Donald Trump - von diversen Seiten beleuchtet. Zunächst werden die geschichtlichen Ursprünge des Rechtsinstituts der Amtsenthebung untersucht, woraufhin dann die aktuelle amerikanische Rechtslage und der sich daraus ergebende Verfahrensgang eines Impeachment-Prozesses aufbereitet werden. Nachdem der Autor im Anschluss Vergleiche mit der Amtsenthebung in anderen Demokratien anstellt, erörtert er schließlich, warum die amerikanische Lösung nicht mehr als ein stumpfes Schwert ist und schlägt daher konsequenterweise im Nachgang einige Reformansätze vor.
Der in englischer Sprache verfasste Aufsatz eignet sich ideal dazu, um sich einen umfassenden Überblick über die Grundstrukturen und die Probleme des amerikanischen Amtsenthebungsverfahrens zu verschaffen und das Rechtsinstitut - angetrieben durch die Reformvorschläge des Autors - kritisch zu durchdenken und dessen rechtsstaatlichen Mehrwert zu hinterfragen.
Table of Contents
Good thing gone bad – Why impeachment needs to be impeached
A. Introduction
B. The instrument of impeachment in the United States
I. Historical background
II. Constitutional anchorage
III. Proceeding
1. The House of Representatives: Sole Impeachment Power
a. Initiation
b. Investigation
c. Final House action
2. The Senate: Sole Power to Try Impeachments
a. Trial preparation
b. Trial procedure
c. Judgement
C. How other democracies remove sitting officials
I. Germany
II. Austria
III. Brazil
D. Why impeachment is a blunt sword
I. Obstruction of inquiries
II. The political system
III. Modern partisanship
E. Alternative concepts
I. Additional branch of control
II. Accountability reform
III. Synthesis
F. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the current inefficacy of the American impeachment process, arguing that the system fails to hold sitting officials accountable due to inherent political constraints. It seeks to analyze the constitutional foundations of impeachment, contrast them with methods in other democracies, identify why the current instrument acts as a "blunt sword," and propose potential structural reforms to improve accountability.
- Historical and constitutional evolution of the US impeachment instrument
- Comparative analysis of removal mechanisms in Germany, Austria, and Brazil
- The role of modern partisanship and institutional obstruction in rendering impeachment ineffective
- Proposals for accountability reform, including "shot clock" mechanisms and legislative oversight
- Potential structural changes to voting processes and branch control
Excerpt from the Book
D. Why impeachment is a blunt sword
As James Madison said, men are not angels, so they need to be controlled. This belief perfectly illustrates the idea of the Constitution’s impeachment clause, namely to hold a president (and other officials) accountable for misbehavior between elections. It institutes an additional instrument of control. But as the abortive impeachment trial against President Trump has revealed, the system apparently does not work. If his conduct is not impeachable, what is at all?
This inevitably leads to the question why other countries – as shown above – were able to enact instruments of control that are actually working whereas the United States remain in a paralyzed-like situation with an instrument that has never, in 230 years, been successfully used to remove a president. Without surprise, there is a whole bunch of reasons for that embarrassing status quo.
I. Obstruction of inquiries
A first factor is the officials’ propensity to stonewall the impeachment inquiries, for instance by retaining crucial documents. Recently, this problematic tendency could be seen in President Trump making effort to hold back essential – probably incriminating – documents concerning the Ukraine scandal. This conduct resulted in Article II of the articles of impeachment against the sitting president.
Summary of Chapters
A. Introduction: Outlines the motivation for the paper, highlighting the perceived failure of recent impeachment trials to curb presidential power.
B. The instrument of impeachment in the United States: Provides a technical overview of the constitutional history, legal provisions, and bicameral proceedings of the American impeachment process.
C. How other democracies remove sitting officials: Compares US impeachment with removal mechanisms in Germany, Austria, and Brazil to provide a broader democratic perspective.
D. Why impeachment is a blunt sword: Identifies obstructionism, fundamental differences in the US political system, and extreme modern partisanship as the primary reasons for the failure of the current system.
E. Alternative concepts: Explores theoretical reforms, such as splitting control mechanisms, introducing "shot clocks" for investigations, and revising voting requirements.
F. Conclusion: Summarizes the necessity for urgent reform to ensure the impeachment process can function as an effective instrument of democratic control.
Keywords
Impeachment, US Constitution, Presidency, Accountability, Partisanship, Bicameralism, Legislative Control, Political Reform, Obstruction, Congressional Power, Comparative Law, Checks and Balances, Executive Privilege, Presidentialism, Democracy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this study?
The study investigates why the American impeachment process has become ineffective as an instrument of political control and explores potential pathways for reform.
What are the primary areas of interest?
The work focuses on the constitutional origins of impeachment, comparative international removal mechanisms, the impact of political polarization, and proposed structural changes to congressional oversight.
What is the central research question?
The author questions why the current impeachment mechanism in the United States fails to effectively remove officials who violate their duties, and what measures could rectify this "blunt sword."
Which scientific method is applied?
The research uses a descriptive legal analysis of constitutional texts and precedents, combined with a comparative analysis of international political systems to highlight the unique deficiencies of the US model.
What topics are discussed in the main section?
The main section covers the procedural mechanics of the House and Senate, international case studies from Germany, Austria, and Brazil, and a critique of modern partisanship and information obstruction by the executive.
Which keywords characterize this paper?
Key concepts include Impeachment, Partisanship, Checks and Balances, Accountability, and Congressional Reform.
How do other countries handle the removal of a president?
The paper highlights that countries like Germany, Austria, and Brazil have established distinct legal procedures, such as involving constitutional courts or public referendums, which are contrasted with the US congressional approach.
What specific reforms are suggested for the impeachment process?
The author proposes several reforms, including implementing a "shot clock" to prevent investigation delays, creating better standards for accessing executive documents, and potentially shifting the voting structure to reduce the influence of extreme partisanship.
- Citation du texte
- Alexander Pollithy (Auteur), 2020, Good thing gone bad. Why impeachment needs to be impeached, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/943806
