underscore the Majority's anemic impeachment case. The Majority's actions are unprecedented, unjustifiable, and will only dilute the significance of the dire recourse that is impeachment. The ramifications for future presidents are not difficult to surmise. If partisan passions are not restrained, the House of Representatives will be thrown into an endless cycle of impeachment, foregoing its duty to legislate and usurping the place of the American people in electing their president.
II.Procedural Background
Apart from those factual and evidentiary shortcomings referenced above, the Majority's dedication to impeaching the President at any cost was well-reflected by their willful disregard of House Rules and congressional precedent. Throughout the first session of the 116th Congress, Chairman Jerrold Nadler repeatedly violated any Rules that inconvenienced the Committee's ardent attempts to impeach the President. The Committee's impeachment-related activities during the first session of the 116th Congress should be viewed as a cautionary tale.
In 1974, Chairman Peter Rodino approached the question of presidential impeachment solemnly and with an eye towards fairness and thoroughness. He worked diligently to ensure that such a country-altering process was conducted with not only bipartisan support, but with the support of the American people. What has occurred in the halls of Congress over the final months of 2019 has been a sharp and unfortunate departure from Chairman Rodino's legacy. The institutional damage done to the House of Representatives by the Majority throughout this impeachment "process" can never be repeated.
For most of 2019, the House Committee on the Judiciary (the "Committee" or the "Judiciary Committee") conducted various "impeachment" hearings outside the scope of its authority under Rule X of the Rules of the House. The Chairman's refusal to seek authorization by a vote of the full House of Representatives as was done in 1974 and 1998—denied every Member of the House of Representatives the opportunity to determine whether such proceedings should commence.
Not only did the Majority fail to seek authorization from the House of Representatives, they insisted they did not need it. On multiple occasions, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the Chairman denied that a vote of the full House of Representatives was necessary prior to conducting an impeachment inquiry, arguing that House committees could conduct oversight pursuant to Rule X of the Rules of the House.[1] This is a manipulative reading of the Rules. Rule X prescribes—in list format—the specific topics over which each House committee may exercise jurisdiction. Impeachment is not listed in Rule X.[2] To add—even temporarily—to a committee's jurisdiction, the full House of Representatives must agree.[3]
The adoption of H. Res. 660 diverged substantially, and without justification, from prior
- ↑ Nadler: These are 'formal impeachment proceedings', CNN (Aug. 8, 2019); Susan Cornwall, U.S. House Will Hold Off on Vote to Authorize Impeachment Probe: Pelosi, Reuters, (Oct. 15, 2019).; Lindsey McPherson, McCarthy Asks Pelosi to Suspend Impeachment Inquiry Until She Defines Procedures, RollCall, (Oct. 3, 2019).
- ↑ Rules of the House of Representative, Rule X.
- ↑ Deschler-Brown's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapter 10. 94th Cong. 2042 (1994).
2
