Our nation’s founders derived the phrase “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” from the basis for impeachment utilized by the British Parliament.
In the original intent of the founders, impeachment was not solely a remedy for an office holder’s commission of a felony. The framers of the U.S. Constitution viewed impeachment as the remedy for a public official’s “abuse or violation of some public trust” (Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 65).
The founders rightly feared that some future president might assume the prerogatives of a monarch or tyrant. They held that the presidency is a sacred trust, and that presidential power is legitimate only if the president is faithful to his oath of office and exercises his singular power for the benefit of the people of the United States.
The power of the presidency is not to be a self-serving instrument. Because of the dangers of presidential overreach, the president is subject to checks and balances by the legislative branch of government.
Are the following consistent with President Trump’s sworn duty to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”? Trump’s ongoing violations of presidential norms; his dishonesty; his extreme secretiveness when dealing with America’s adversaries; his disdain for America’s traditional allies; his willingness to trust Vladimir Putin more than America’s intelligence agencies; his and his attorney general’s continual stonewalling of congressional attempts to provide oversight of the executive branch—this list could go on and on.
Trump has on numerous occasions behaved in ways that would get him fired in the private sector. Trump is obviously to be held to much higher standards than those of business ethics. We must never forget that Trump, by swearing his oath of office, has entered into a fiduciary relationship with his employers — we the people of the United States of America.
Trump is not automatically a worthy office holder if he merely eludes indictment for criminal felonies. He is not automatically a worthy president if the evidence of his misconduct falls short of meeting the evidentiary standard for a criminal indictment — prima facie evidence that is beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump and every other president is to be held to much higher standards than those of the Federal Criminal Code.
If Trump is not subject to impeachment, will any future president ever be subject to impeachment? Or is the presidential oath of office now “sound and fury, signifying nothing”?
Andrew G. Bjelland
Andrew G. Bjelland, Ph.D., is professor emeritus, Philosophy Department, Seattle University, and resides in Salt Lake City.