How Should Constitutional Breaches Be Handled?

The Populist Party on their website defines it this way, “A true breach of trust; a violation of the Constitution; bribery; breaking a treaty, starting a war with another country, taking of the federal treasury and passing it on to one's wealthy friends for instance; there should be no question that these are high crimes and misdemeanors and they should be quickly punished by impeachment.” (1)

In 1992, William Jefferson Clinton was elected as president of the United States defeating President George Bush who was running for his second term. From the outset the Clinton administration had to deal with a number of scandals, which culminated in his alleged sexual tryst with an internist, Monica Lewinsky. Many throughout the nation believed that President Clinton’s behavior was a breach of the constitution. If this was so, how could it be handled?

Initially this breach could have been handled with a simple censure of the President by the Congressional bodies that make up our legislative branch of government. This is the
easiest way of handling a constitutional breach. The next level is to appoint a special prosecutor to convene a grand jury to investigate the breach. This process normally will
lead to charges being filed, as was the case with President Clinton. Once the charges were determined, the legislative body of our government then began the process of impeachment against the President. The impeachment hearing is much like a trial with witnesses being called and a judgment being made by the House of Representatives. Once they have found the individual guilty, that judgment is sent to the Senate. In the case of President Clinton, the Senate did not uphold the charges and that ended the impeachment hearing. If however, the Senate had upheld the charges, then the final step in handling a constitutional breach takes place: President Clinton would have been removed from office.