Civics 101 — Impeachment, or How to Bring Charges to Remove a Federal Government Official from Office

Jane Jewell • August 2, 2022


Don’t like the mayor or governor? Think the local sheriff is lazy? Convinced that Sen. So-and-So is corrupt? Disapprove of the president? Well, you could wait and vote them out in the next election, but what if the situation seems very serious and you want them out now? Then you may feel like joining the cry to “have the scoundrel impeached.”

 

However, at the national level, impeachment is the first step of a multi-step process contained in the United States Constitution to authorize the removal of government officials from office. It doesn’t apply to ordinary citizens, just to certain federal officials. That process begins with impeachment in the House of Representatives.

 

There are many misunderstandings about what impeachment can and can’t do. In fact, it can’t do what many assume are its main purposes; impeachment can’t remove someone from office nor can it impose a fine or send anyone to jail. Presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were both impeached but neither was removed from office. The impeachment procedure only allows the House to investigate and then recommend for or against handing an impeached official over to the Senate for trial. The House impeaches or indicts; the Senate convicts and removes from office, or acquits.

 

The impeachment process is much like a grand jury that meets to evaluate if there is enough evidence for a particular criminal case to go to trial.

 

England used a form of impeachment as far back as the 14th Century. Ironically, Britain's use of impeachment began to decline at about the same time that an impeachment process adapted from England's process was written into the new U.S. Constitution. The last impeachment in Britain was in 1806. While still legally available, Britons rely these days on a vote of no-confidence when they want to oust leadership. 

 

Although the rules and grounds for impeachment vary, every state except Oregon has an impeachment clause in their state constitutions. In fact, several of these state impeachment clauses — including Maryland’s first constitution — were adopted before the U.S. Constitution was even written. Recently, in 2021, the New York state legislature began an impeachment inquiry into then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, but Cuomo resigned before he was impeached. In February of this year, a Trump-supported Republican lawmaker in Maryland introduced a bill in the state legislature to impeach Republican Gov. Larry Hogan. The bill failed.

 

The process for the Federal level is outlined in the U.S. Constitution; and some relevant parts are quoted below.

 

Step 1. Charges or accusations against a government official are presented to the House by a House member or group of members — similar to introducing a bill. 

 

Step 2. The House or a House committee investigates the charges and writes up Articles of Impeachment. Hearings are held.

 

Step 3. The full House votes yea or nay on the Articles of Impeachment. If the Articles do not pass, then the impeachment process ends and the accused remains in office. If the Articles pass, then the accused person has been officially impeached and the case is turned over to the Senate for trial. Technically, impeachment is over at this point.

 

Step 4. Trial and vote in the Senate. Senate rules state that the trial must begin at 1:00 pm on the day after the Articles of Impeachment are delivered to the Senate. However, there is no rule or time-table about how or when the House must deliver the articles.

 

Step 5. If the Senate votes to convict, then the impeached official is automatically and immediately removed from office. There is no other automatic penalty — no fine or imprisonment may be imposed.

 

Bonus Step. The Senate, in a separate, second vote, may also prohibit the convicted and removed official from ever holding public office again. This prohibition is not automatic upon conviction.

 

To pass, the Articles of Impeachment need a simple majority of those representatives present and voting. Today, if all 435 members of the House of Representatives are present and vote, passage would require 216 votes in favor of impeachment. While impeachment by the House only requires a simple majority, conviction in the Senate requires a supermajority of two-thirds of those present and voting. Almost everyone — House and Senate — shows up for these votes.

 

There are some broad conditions and limits. Articles of Impeachment may be brought only against the "President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States" and only if they are accused of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

 

Treason and bribery are relatively clear and well-understood terms, having basically the same meaning today as they did in Colonial times. However, the Constitution did not precisely define “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” or "civil Officer of the United States." Over the years, there has been a lot of argument and disagreement over these terms. 

 

At the time the Constitution was written in 1787, “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” was a common term and generally referred to inappropriate and/or illegal activities by those who held a powerful or “high” office, especially when the office itself was used for personal profit, to play favorites, or to promote personal agendas and biases. Most impeachments have been for high crimes and misdemeanors. 

 

While actual impeachment votes in the House are rather rare, demands for impeachment and threats of impeachments, especially of presidents, have been common throughout U.S. history. The ink was barely dry on the Constitution before the calls for impeachment of various officials started way back during George Washington’s administration. The first impeachment vote in the House was in 1797, the second in 1803. In total, the House has initiated impeachment proceedings 63 times but most were unsuccessful or charges were dropped without a vote.

 

To date, the House has voted to impeach 21 times, on charges against 20 people. Three presidents have been impeached — Andrew Johnson in 1868, Bill Clinton in 1998, and Donald Trump in 2019 and 2021. None were convicted. 

 

Only eight impeachments of the 21 have resulted in a Senate conviction — all of those were federal judges. Another seven judges were impeached but acquitted in the Senate. Two other judges — one in 1873 and another in 1926 — were impeached but they resigned and the proceedings were halted before a Senate trial.

 

So far, no impeachments have charged treason. Three were for bribery; two of those officials were tried and removed from office by the Senate. The third resigned before trial and was — ironically — later acquitted by the Senate.

 

Impeachment is not part of the legal system but a congressional judgment on “fitness for office.”

 

Neither conviction nor acquittal affects the official’s exposure to legal prosecution. The accused person can be indicted in criminal court or sued in civil court regarding the same charges. If convicted in the legal system, there can be fines, imprisonment, or other punishments even if the person was acquitted in the House or Senate. 

 

Likewise, impeachment charges do not need to be for actual “crimes,” that is, illegal activities. Officials have been impeached and convicted on charges of drunkenness and biased decisions. Andrew Johnson was charged in two articles for rude language along with bad behavior that reflected badly on the office of the presidency. These actions did not necessarily break any laws.

 

Conversely, some actual crimes have been determined to not amount to high crimes or misdemeanors. The Judiciary Committee of the House previously determined that any tax fraud committed by then-president Richard Nixon was not impeachable because it was committed in Nixon’s private life and was not an abuse of his authority as president. 

 

Benjamin Franklin said that impeachment was a needed recourse for when a president “has rendered himself obnoxious.” In 1970, almost two hundred years later, Gerald Ford, then House minority leader and later president, added that "an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”

 

 

Sources and More information can be found at these websites:

40 Facts About the History of Impeachment, Trista, History Collection, May 26, 2019.

https://historycollection.com/40-facts-about-the-history-of-impeachment-and-the-presidents-who-couldnt-escape-its-fate/

 

Constitution Facts

https://www.constitutionfacts.com

 

Impeachment, history.com editors, History, Feb. 21, 2021. 

https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/impeachment-in-us-history

 

Impeachment Fast Facts, CNN Politics, Sept. 27, 2021.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/29/world/impeachment-fast-facts/index.html

 

Impeachment in the United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States

 

 

Jane Jewell is a writer, editor, photographer, and teacher. She has worked in news, publishing, and as the director of a national writer's group. She lives in Chestertown with her husband Peter Heck, a ginger cat named Riley, and a lot of books.

 

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

US Wind, Oceantic Pitch Offshore Wind Future Amid Trump Attacks

By Jan Plotczyk • September 10, 2025
 At Shore Progress’s monthly meeting last week, the tension between national politics and local opportunity was on full display. With President Donald Trump escalating his attacks on offshore wind, representatives from US Wind and the Oceantic Network made their case directly to members gathered in Salisbury. From the outset, the presenters stressed the scale of what’s coming to the Eastern Shore. “This project is the equivalent of building two nuclear power plants off our coast,” US Wind representative Dave Wilson said, pointing to plans for 114 turbines and four offshore substations. Together, he said, the project will generate two net gigawatts of clean energy, enough to power approximately 26% of the homes in Maryland. The presentation walked members through the timeline: a four-phase buildout beginning in the southeast corner of the lease area, with each phase, including its own export cable, routed through Indian River Bay into the regional grid at the Indian River Power Plant in Delaware. Environmental safeguards on display Slides showed how US Wind plans to minimize negative effects on wildlife. The company will use an aircraft detection lighting system to keep turbines dark until a low-flying aircraft approaches, reducing night-sky light pollution. Marine protections include bubble curtains to dampen noise during pile driving, visual and acoustic monitoring for whales, and strict shutdown zones if animals enter construction areas. Lights will be on less than 1% of the time in any given year, underscoring their view that offshore wind can coexist with migratory birds, commercial fishing, and marine transit. Economic promise for the Shore The discussion turned quickly to what the project means locally. US Wind pledged hundreds of jobs for the Shore, with commitments to use union labor and partner with minority, women, and veteran-owned businesses. Officials noted that the Lower Shore Workforce Alliance has already received $700,000 from Maryland Works for Wind to build training programs, while community colleges are adjusting trade curricula to educate the next generation of turbine technicians. A planned operations and maintenance facility in West Ocean City will house technicians and crew transfer vessels, bringing steady employment and infrastructure investment to the harbor. A national fight with local stakes The meeting didn’t shy away from politics. Several members noted Trump’s repeated attempts to derail offshore wind projects including his latest push to revoke US Wind’s federal permit. US Wind officials acknowledged that such lawsuits could delay progress but insisted that the project’s federal approvals are on solid ground. “This is the Eastern Shore's moment,” Shore Progress Chair Jared Schablein said, referring to a slide that showed more than $815 million in offshore wind investments statewide. “The question is whether politics will slow us down, or whether we keep building for the Shore’s future.” The presentation had a clear message: Offshore wind is not just about clean power, but also about jobs, investment, and opportunity for Eastern Shore families. Jan Plotczyk spent 25 years as a survey and education statistician with the federal government, at the Census Bureau and the National Center for Education Statistics. She retired to Rock Hall.

Gov. Moore Signs “Housing Starts Here” Order to Tackle Maryland’s Affordability Crisis

By Gren Whitman • September 10, 2025
Standing at the Legacy at Twin Rivers apartment community in Howard County, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed an executive order aimed at addressing his state’s deepening housing crisis. Titled Housing Starts Here, his order is designed to accelerate construction of affordable homes and cut through what Moore called years of “no and slow” decision-making in state housing policy. Maryland is facing a shortage of at least 96,000 housing units, according to state estimates, a gap that officials say has driven up prices, pushed families out of the state, and stifled economic growth. “Building pathways to wealth for Marylanders, creating jobs, attracting new businesses and residents, growing our economy, and securing our future all start with housing,” Moore said at the signing. “We need to be the state of yes and now.” Five guiding principles The executive order lays out five core priorities for state housing policy: Use state land for housing . Agencies must identify surplus properties and land near transit stations that can be converted into new housing developments. Cut red tape. State permitting processes will be streamlined, with new rules allowing third-party reviewers to accelerate approvals. Strengthen partnerships. A new State Housing Ombudsman will serve as a liaison to help coordinate projects between state agencies, local governments, and developers. Set clear goals. By January 2026, the state will publish housing production targets for each county and update them every five years. Incentivize affordable housing. Jurisdictions that meet housing targets or pass pro-housing policies will be recognized with new Maryland Housing Leadership Awards, making them more competitive for state funding. Speed as the priority State officials said the new framework is focused on cutting delays that can hold back projects for years. By digitizing applications, engaging multiple agencies simultaneously, and allowing outside reviewers, the state aims to expedite project completion while upholding environmental and community standards. What could this mean for us on the Eastern Shore? Moore acknowledged that housing affordability consistently ranks as Marylanders’ No. 1 concern. For young people in particular, high costs and long commutes are major reasons they leave the state. The order seeks to reverse that trend, tying housing growth to job creation and transit access. On the Eastern Shore , where rental availability and starter homes are limited, Moore’s order could open opportunities for mixed-use, transit-oriented projects on state-owned land, as well as accelerate approval for affordable housing initiatives backed by nonprofits and local developers. What comes next The Department of Housing and Community Development will publish the state’s first set of production targets by Jan. 1, 2026, followed by annual progress reports starting in 2027. Agencies have until March 2026 to implement many of the new permitting and funding acceleration rules. Moore framed the executive order as a generational investment. “Making housing more affordable is not just about building shelter, it’s about building a legacy,” he said.

Alsobrooks Leads Push to Remove RFK Jr. From HHS, Citing “Costs, Chaos, and Corruption”

By Gren Whitman • September 10, 2025
Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) has intensified her calls for Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to step down, releasing a detailed report that she says proves his tenure has been a disaster for American families. The first senator to demand Kennedy’s resignation in May, Alsobrooks joined Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) in unveiling a 54-page report that chronicles what they describe as the “costly, chaotic, and corrupt” record of Kennedy’s first 203 days at the department. Released before Kennedy’s Senate hearing last week, the report outlines examples of alleged mismanagement for each day since he was sworn in on Feb. 13. “Robert Kennedy’s tenure as America’s chief health officer has been higher costs, more chaos, and boundless corruption,” Wyden said. “His actions are endangering children, leaving parents confused and scared, and forcing families and taxpayers to pay more for their health care.” Echoing that assessment, Alsobrooks cited testimony from scientists at the National Institutes of Health in Maryland who she says have watched critical cancer research grind to a halt under Kennedy’s leadership. “His actions are increasing Americans’ health care costs, causing chaos, and furthering the Trump administration’s endless stream of corruption,” she said. The report argues that Kennedy has: Driven up costs by backing the Trump administration’s budget plan, which Alsobrooks says strips health coverage from 15 million Americans while handing tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations. Created chaos by dismantling HHS programs, undermining research institutions, and promoting vaccine misinformation. Engaged in corruption by using the office to advance personal and family financial interests, particularly around limiting vaccine access. Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, praised Alsobrooks’ leadership. “President Trump and Senate Republicans made a grievous error when entrusting Kennedy with our nation’s health,” the group said in. “It is far past time that President Trump rectifies this error by firing Kennedy before more lives are unnecessarily put at risk.” Alsobrooks appeared on the Morning Joe TV show on to discuss the findings and to reiterate her demand that Kennedy resign or be removed. “This is about protecting families and protecting science,” she said. “Our nation’s health system cannot afford another day under Robert Kennedy’s reckless watch.” As a community organizer, journalist, administrator, project planner/manager, and consultant, Gren Whitman has led neighborhood, umbrella, public interest, and political committees and groups, and worked for civil rights and anti-war organizations.

Wicomico Officials Advance ICE Partnership Amid Community Opposition and Rising Concerns

By CSES Staff • September 10, 2025
Wicomico County leaders have announced plans to move forward with the federal government’s controversial 287(g) program, entering into an agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that would deputize local officers to serve immigration warrants inside the county jail. Under the model selected, known as the Warrant Service Officer program, specially trained deputies at the detention center would be allowed to serve civil immigration warrants on individuals already in custody. County Executive Julie Giordano and Sheriff Mike Lewis emphasized that deputies would not conduct street-level immigration enforcement. “Public safety is our top responsibility,” Giordano said. “The Warrant Service Officer program provides our sheriff’s office with the tools they need to address individuals already in custody who may pose a risk to our community at no additional cost to the county.” Lewis added that the program “gives our deputies the ability to safely and lawfully carry out their duties while ensuring that Wicomico County remains a secure place to live, work, and raise a family.” Community pushback The announcement drew swift opposition from civil rights and community organizations, including the ACLU of Maryland, the Wicomico NAACP, and local grassroots groups such as Crabs on the Shore, who have warned that the agreement will harm immigrant families, sow fear, and erode trust between residents and law enforcement. Opponents also criticized the process, arguing that the decision was rushed through without meaningful public input despite repeated calls for hearings. “This is being framed as an administrative detail, but it has huge consequences for our neighbors,” one advocate said. Concerns about cost and precedent Supporters of the WSO model have emphasized that the partnership comes “at no additional cost” to Wicomico taxpayers, but critics point out that other jurisdictions have found otherwise. Anne Arundel County canceled its own 287(g) agreement, citing high costs and community backlash. The Camden Police Department in Delaware withdrew from a similar partnership after public protests in May. Advocates note that the federal government does not fully reimburse counties for the time, training, and legal exposure associated with 287(g) programs, leaving local taxpayers to shoulder hidden expenses. First on Delmarva If finalized, Wicomico County would become the first government or police agency on the Delmarva Peninsula to formally enter into a 287(g) agreement with ICE. Supporters say that distinction demonstrates a commitment to accountability and public safety. Opponents warn it risks branding the county as hostile to immigrant communities that have long been central to the Shore’s workforce, particularly in poultry processing and agriculture. The county’s decision comes amid a broader national debate about local involvement in federal immigration enforcement, with critics warning that partnerships like 287(g) make communities less safe by discouraging victims and witnesses from coming forward. For now, the final agreement is pending federal approval. But with strong opposition already mobilized, the fight over Wicomico’s new partnership is likely only beginning.

Wicomico Democrats Silent as County Leaders Advance ICE Agreement

By CSES Staff • September 10, 2025
Wicomico County Republicans have moved forward with an agreement to join the federal 287(g) program, aligning the county with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). County Executive Julie Giordano and Sheriff Mike Lewis are backing the program to train county officers at the detention center to help ICE identify non-citizens for deportation proceedings. The agreement has triggered strong pushback from immigrant advocates, civil rights groups, and community leaders who warn that this partnership will erode trust between residents and law enforcement, risk racial profiling, and allot local tax dollars to assist federal immigration enforcement. Yet amid the growing controversy, the Wicomico County Democratic Central Committee has issued no response to the ICE agreement, even as residents voice frustration that the Democratic establishment’s silence has ceded the conversation to Republicans. Moreover, the Central Committee has remained silent with regard to recent comments by Democratic Councilwoman April Jackson, who told the Washington Post that the poultry industry should reduce its reliance on immigrant workers. Jackson also said, “a lot of Americans aren’t employed because the Haitians are taking our jobs.” Jackson’s remarks have drawn widespread criticism from immigrant advocates. For many residents, the Democratic leadership’s silence is as much of a concern as the county government’s new partnership with ICE. As the county waits for federal approval of the 287(g) agreement, the absence of a Democratic counterweight has left immigrant families and community organizers to carry the opposition on their own.
D

As Questions Swirl About County Executive Run, Del. Sheree Sample-Hughes to Host Community Conversation in Dorchester

By Community Desk • September 10, 2025
With speculation mounting that Delegate Sheree Sample-Hughes (D-37A) may run for County Executive for Wicomico County in 2026, the longtime Eastern Shore lawmaker will headline a Community Conversation in Dorchester County on Sept. 17 at 6 pm. Sponsored by the Eastern Shore Democrats, the event will give residents the opportunity to hear Sample-Hughes speak about local priorities — schools, public safety, health care access, and economic development in the mid-Shore. Sample-Hughes, former Speaker Pro Tem of the Maryland House of Delegates, has represented portions of Wicomico and Dorchester counties for more than a decade. Her record includes bipartisan work on district projects, as well as efforts to expand health services and invest in infrastructure. Although organizers emphasize that the Sept. 17 gathering is not a campaign event, the timing has fueled interest. Political observers note that any appearance by Sample-Hughes will be closely watched as Democrats weigh potential challengers for County Executive in the upcoming cycle. The forum will include remarks from the delegate, followed by a question-and-answer session. Seating is available first-come, first-served and residents from across the Shore are encouraged to attend. Key details What: Community Conversation with Del. Sheree Sample-Hughes When: Sept. 17, 6 pm Where: Dorchester County, venue to be announced by organizers. Format: Remarks followed by audience Q&A Before her election to the House of Delegates, Sample-Hughes served on the Wicomico County Council. Should she enter the county executive race, many believe she would be a serious challenger to Republican incumbent Julie Giordano.
Show More