subject to impeachment for "high Crimes and Misdemeanors." This is a core premise of the impeachment power.
Fourth, we address whether the House must accept at face value President Trump's claim that his motives were not corrupt. In short, no. When the House probes a President's state of mind, its mandate is to find the facts. That means evaluating the President's account of his motives to see if it rings true. The question is not whether the President's conduct could have resulted from permissible motives. It is whether the President's real reasons, the ones in his mind at the time, were legitimate. Where the House discovers persuasive evidence of corrupt wrongdoing, it is entitled to rely upon that evidence to impeach.
Fifth, we explain that attempted Presidential wrongdoing is impeachable. Mason himself said so at the Constitutional Convention, where he described "attempts to subvert the Constitution" as a core example of "great and dangerous offenses."[1] Moreover, the Judiciary Committee reached the same conclusion in President Nixon's case. Historical precedent thus confirms that ineptitude and insubordination do not afford the President a defense to impeachment. A President cannot escape impeachment just because his scheme to abuse power, betray the nation, or corrupt elections was discovered and abandoned.
Finally, we consider whether impeachment "nullifies" the last election or denies voters their voice in the next one. The Framers themselves weighed this question. They considered relying solely on elections—rather than impeachment—to remove wayward Presidents. That position was firmly rejected. No President is entitled to persist in office after committing "high Crimes and Misdemeanors," and no one who voted for him in the last election is entitled to expect he will do so. Where the President's misconduct is aimed at corrupting elections, relying on elections to solve the problem is no safeguard at all.
III.The Purpose of Impeachment
Freedom must not be taken for granted. It demands constant protection from leaders whose taste of power sparks a voracious need for more. Time and again, republics have fallen to officials who care little for the law and use the public trust for private gain.
The Framers of the Constitution knew this well. They saw corruption erode the British constitution from within. They heard kings boast of their own excellence while conspiring with foreign powers and consorting with shady figures. As talk of revolution spread, they objected as King George III used favors and party politics to control Parliament, aided by men who sold their souls and welcomed oppression.
The Framers risked their freedom, and their lives, to escape that monarchy. So did their families and many of their friends. Together, they resolved to build a nation committed to democracy and the rule of law—a beacon to the world in an age of aristocracy. In the United States of America, "We the
- ↑ Cass R. Sunstein, Impeachment: A Citizen's Guide 47 (2017).
33
