Skip to main content

Tim Milbrodt: Impeaching a Supreme Court Justice


Tim Milbrodt
Pols 304
Blog Post 1
Impeaching a Supreme Court Justice
            In the last week more allegations of sexual assault or misconduct have surfaced against recently appointed Supreme Court Justice Bret Kavanaugh. In the wake of these new allegations, Democratic Senators Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment (Zhou 2019). The calls from Harris and Warren for impeachment are examples of national representation because these Senators are trying to display leadership on a national scale; something which may also serve to increase the chances of each Senator becoming the next Democratic candidate for President (Adler et al 2019). While these Senators themselves cannot initiate an impeachment based on Article I of the U.S. Constitution, their calls for impeachment have spurred younger colleagues in the House of Representatives to take action.
            Recently, Representative Ayanna Pressley filed an impeachment resolution against Kavanaugh in the House of Representatives. If the House passes the resolution, it would launch an investigation against Kavanaugh by the House Judiciary Committee (Zhou 2019). After the investigation the House could then initiate impeachment proceedings by a simple majority vote. According to Article I of the United States Constitution, the Senate would then conduct an impeachment trial, with a two thirds majority vote necessary for conviction. If Kavanaugh were to be impeached and removed from the Supreme Court, it would be the first time in United States history that Congress has successfully executed the impeachment of a United States Supreme Court Justice. While Congress has removed eight federal judges from office via impeachment, the only attempted impeachment of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice failed to remove Samuel Chase from the bench when he was acquitted in 1805 (Brockell 2019). While Kavanaugh’s fate remains uncertain for now, there are several factors which will influence the outcome.
            Representatives such as Ayanna Pressley looking to initiate impeachment proceedings currently have an attentive public backing them, as sexual assault has become an issue of concern for many voters. Currently advocacy groups such as Planned Parenthood and Demand Justice have called for further investigation into the allegations against Kavanaugh (Zhou 2019). These attentive publics and groups will have some impact on legislators as they are the individuals most likely to organize, donate time and money, and vote in elections (Adler et al 2019). The fact that Rep. Pressley has many colleagues who are also freshman congress people could increase her chances of success. As Adler et al note “...newly elected members of Congress will often reflect the most recent trends in public opinion better than the members they replace...”(Adler et al 2019). These newly elected representatives would be more likely to be influenced by recent social movements such as #MeToo, making them more likely to vote in favor of initiating this process. While these factors might increase the chances of Kavanaugh being impeached, there are many factors which suggest Rep. Pressley’s attempt will likely end in failure.
            While Rep. Pressley may have an attentive public backing her position, she does not seem to have unified backing from her party, as Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee are currently more focused on their attempts to impeach the President (Silverstein 2019). If this challenge is overcome and the House does vote to impeach Kavanaugh, this action will face its biggest challenge in the U.S. Senate where the Republicans hold fifty-three seats and the Democrats hold forty-five seats. With the Republicans holding the majority in the Senate, getting the two-thirds majority necessary for a conviction may be an insurmountable hurdle for Democrats favoring impeachment.
Still, it is not inconceivable that Kavanaugh could be impeached as hypothetically, if a big enough minority from the Republican party were to vote in favor of conviction along with the Democratic minority, they could overcome the Republican majority in what is known as a “roll” (Hitt 2019). However, this is highly unlikely based on the fact that the current Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell has been an outspoken supporter of Bret Kavanaugh’s since his confirmation hearings last fall (Silverstein 2019). Republican Senators would be highly unlikely to jeopardize re-election, or a desired committee appointment by going against the current Senate Majority Leader.  Adler et al note that “...filling vacancies on the Supreme Court has emerged as one of the most partisan issues of the 21st Century” (Adler et al 2019). Because of this I suggest that the impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice is likely to be an extremely partisan issue as well, making the possibility of removing Bret Kavanaugh by impeachment an extremely unlikely outcome at this time.



Sources Cited
Adler, Scott E., Jenkins, Jeffery A., and Shipan, Charles R. The United States Congress, first ed.
            W.W. Norton & Co. 2019. Ebook. Kindle.
Brockell, Gillian. “Only One Supreme Court Justice Has Ever Been Impeached”. The Washington
Post. 16 September 2019.
Hitt, Mathew. “Social Choice and History”. Lecture. Colorado State University. 9 September
2019.
Silverstein, Jason. “Could Bret Kavanaugh Be Impeached?”. CBS News. 16 September 2019.
Zhou, Li. “Ayanna Pressley Just Filed an Impeachment Resolution Against Bret Kavanaugh in the
House”. Vox. 17 September 2019.




Comments

  1. This was a really well written post. It made some very good points from each side. The quote from Adler et al. about newly elected members representing the more recent trends in public opinion more than the members that they replace really stood out to me. That is not something that stood out to me initially in the reading, but especially in this case, I think that it is very true. Newly elected officials probably campaign more on current issues compared to the agenda and focus of current officials. These new people want to serve their constituents well, so they will focus on the things that are currently happening in order to win votes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great article all around. You are absolutely correct when you point out that the Senate is highly unlikely to convict Kavanaugh. The only Supreme Court justice to be impeached was Samuel Chase in 1805 but he was not convicted by the Senate. The same goes for the only two presidents that were impeached: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Neither president was convicted by the Senate. Given the current Republican majority, there is no way a supermajority could be reached in order to impeach Kavanaugh. The Democrats could possibly move forward with impeachment if they win back the Senate and keep the House but they would have to win by a significant margin.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great blog post and a great topic. When most people think of Impeachment, they often think of the president. I believe you did a great job showing how a supreme court justice can be impeached. Additionally, I can honestly say that I learned something new from reading your post. Personally I am interested to see how history will view these current events and the actions that are taking place within our government. For example, I am not sure history will be too kind to those who allowed Kavanaugh to be a Justice. I personally think that his seat in the court will have long lasting effects on this country.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Two-Party System: Possible Impacts on Polarization & Congressional Policy Making

Edward Baisley Prof. Matthew Hitt POLS 304 16 Oct. 2019 Blog Post 2 (Two Party System)             The two-party system in the United States of America has been an integral part of our political culture since the country’s inception in the 1700’s. Since then, our country has accepted this system as an inevitable part of how our nation’s leaders are chosen, nominated, and elected into office. Now days, when it comes to our contemporary national congress, both parties have spent an incredible amount of money and resources in an attempt to seize majority control in both the House and the Senate. This attempt to seize majority power in our legislative branch has led to a situation of heated competition. In fact, in recent history, we as citizens of this nation have seen our national Legislator become a partisan battle ground in which both parties and their members are seemingly polarized to an extent that the ...

TABOR and Colorado Politics Post-CC

       One of the more contentious topics within Colorado politics is budgeting and funding for projects, education, and revenue intake. This came to a head in this year's election with Proposition CC. Despite failing at the ballot box, the Democratic Party is pushing ahead with the 2020 legislative agenda that includes drafts to eliminate the Tax Payer's Bill of Rights or amend it to ensure more accessible revenue for the party's policy objectives. What is critical to the debate is the increasing partisan divide within Colorado, the historical shift from Republican control to Democrat trifectas in state government, and the institutional mechanisms that have hampered strategy for the dominant party. Also, in the mix are interest groups that influence local politics which can help uncover party strategy from another perspective.        The Colorado Fiscal Institute (CFI) a left-leaning think tank, is a key player in this battle, authoring s everal...

TABOR & Proposition CC: Providing Context to Colorado's Tax Problem

Edward Baisley Prof. Matthew Hitt POLS 304 Dec. 2019 Blog Post 3 (TABOR and Proposition CC) Colorado's tax system is very unique in comparison to pretty much every other state in the U.S. Arguably the biggest aspect of the tax system that is unique is the amendment to the Colorado Constitution known as TABOR or the Tax Payers Bill of Rights. This amendment which was drafted into law in 1992, has many implications for Colorado's state and local governments. One of the main implications is that TABOR requires the state and local governments of Colorado to acquire voter approval before any tax increase can be implemented. Some other more less known implications are detailed by Denver Post author Anna Staver, she explains that TABOR: “ Limits how many tax dollars governments can keep … It’s called the TABOR cap, anything a government collects above the cap gets returned as a TABOR tax refund … (TABOR) Limits when lawmakers can ask voters to raise taxe...