SEC. 4. The President, Vice-President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misde meanors. The President must execute all laws of the United States, whether he may judge them to be expedient or inexpedient, constitutional or unconstitutional. He has no discretionary power here, but must take care that all laws of the United States be faithfully executed, until they are either repealed by Congress, or set aside as unconstitutional by the Judiciary. The monarchs of France and England have the power to prorogue or dissolve their respective Parliaments at pleasure; but in a case of dissolution they are expected soon to convene a new one. The French king, after dissolving the Chamber of Deputies, must convene another within three months. SEC. 4. This Section was necessary in order to designate the officers liable to impeachment, the offences which would expose them to impeachment, and the necessary consequence of impeachment. The last clause, "or other high crimes and misdemeanors," was added in the course of the discussion, because many of the highest crimes known are neither treason nor bribery. This may be seen in part by the definition of treason in Article 3, Sec. 3. All officers of the United States who hold their offices under the national government, whether their duties are executive or judicial, in the highest or in the lowest departments of government, with the exception of officers in the army and navy, are properly civil officers, within the meaning of the Constitution, and liable to impeachment. Such are Heads of Departments, judges of the supreme and inferior Courts, officers of the revenue and customs, post-masters, etc. etc. Military and naval officers are tried by Courts martial. Has the President any discretionary power about executing the laws? What if he judge them inexpedient, or unconstitutional? Who can repeal laws? What power can set aside unconstitutional laws? What power have the monarchs of France and England? What are they expected to do if they dissolve Parliament? Why was Sec. 4 necessary? Why was the last clause added? Where may this be seen? What officers are liable to impeachment? Give examples. ARTICLE III. SEC. 1. The Judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges both of the supreme and inferior Courts shall hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. The ART. 3. SEC. 1. The necessity of such a power was so apparent as not to be questioned. The object of having one Supreme Court is uniformity of decisions in all cases. question on the necessity of inferior Courts we have already noticed sufficiently. All experience on this subject shows the wisdom of making judges independent. This is well done in the present case by the tenure of their office and the fixed nature of their salaries. Both in monarchies and republics it is the safest barrier that can be erected against the encroachments both of the executive and legislative powers. It need hardly be added, that these principles were distinctly brought to view in all the plans proposed. Temporary appointments of judges are made by Congress for the territories of the United States; because such officers were not contemplated in the Constitution. But the case is altered, and comes within the provisions of the Constitution, when a territory becomes a State. In what is the Judicial power vested? What is the term of office of Judges? What is said of their compensation? What does all What is the object of having one Supreme Court? experience show? How is it done in the present case? Could it be better done? In what governments is it a safe barrier? Against what? Do you think such encroachments are likely to happen if not guarded against? What exception to the tenure of the judicial office? Why this exception? When and how is the case altered? SEC. 2. The Judicial Power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;-to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;-to controversies between two or more States;-between a State and citizens of another State-between citizens of different States;-between citizens of the same State claiming lands under grants of different States;-and between a State, or the citizens thereof, and foreign States, citizens, or subjects. In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both SEC. 2. "The judicial power shall extend,” etc. It is easy to see a reason for all these provisions, either in the national character of the points to be adjudicated, or in the necessary surrender of them by the States, in order to form a harmonious general government. The 11th amendment restricts this clause in respect of cases between a State and citizens of another or of a foreign State. Cases in law are such as require the Court to determine what the law is. Cases in equity are such as require of the Court the proper correction or qualification of law, when the words are too severe or defective; or the extension of the words of the law to cases not expressed, yet coming within the reason and intention of the law. Cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction are such as arise on the high seas. To what cases does the judicial power extend? From what does the reason of these provisions arise? What clause is restricted by the 11th amendment? What are cases in law? Cases in equity? Cases of admiralty, etc.? In what cases has the Supreme Court original jurisdiction? In what has it appellate jurisdiction? as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the Congress shall make. The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the State where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed. SEC 3. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. "In all cases affecting ambassadors," etc. A court's haying original jurisdiction, in a given case, implies that the first trial of the case must be by that court. Its having appellate jurisdiction, implies that a case must be brought before it, if at all, by appeal from a lower court. Its having jurisdiction as to law and fact, signifies its authority to judge of the law applicable to the case tried, or to be tried, and of the facts proved by the testimony. "The trial of all crimes," etc. Cases of impeachment are provided for in the constitution of the Senate. The violation of the right of trial by jury, and the transportation of persons for trial to distant parts, or beyond seas, were among the gravest charges against the British king, which induced the declaration of independence. They are therefore here expressly guarded against, while, as before, things not to be foreseen or enumerated are left to Congress. These regard crimes committed, for instance, on the high seas, or out of the territorial jurisdiction of any State. The sixth Article of amendments furnishes some farther directions on the subjects of this clause. SEC. 3. "Treason against the United States," etc. No conspiracy against the government of the United States, nor even the enlistment of men with a view to its subversion, can What is the difference between original and appellate jurisdiction? What charges were made against the British king? What article of amendments is referred to? What is treason? What does not constitute treason? No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture, except during the life of the person attainted. constitute the crime of treason. For that purpose there must be an actual assemblage of men for treasonable purposes, or some overt act of adherence to the enemy. And in such case not the leader or prime mover only, but all who assemble, or are accessary to such assembling, or perform any act of adherence to them or to the enemy, which shall mark them as leagued in the general conspiracy, however remote they may be from the scene of action, are guilty of treason. The principal difficulty arose from the question whether treason against a particular State might not be treason also against the United States, and so liable to double punishment. The difficulty could not be entirely removed; but it was concluded that the Constitution should regard the sovereignty of the United States alone, and provide for the punishment of treason against them only. The requirement of two witnesses was inserted because prosecutions for treason are apt to be violent, which increases the danger of perjury. "The Congress shall have power to declare" etc. This clause is intended both to give the specified power, and to guard against an undue use of it by a restriction similar to that in Article 1, Sec. 9. The punishment of treason is death by hanging. What must take place to constitute treason? Who are guilty of treason besides the prime mover? What difficulty arose on this Section? How did the Convention conclude to do? Why were two witnesses required to convict of treason? What restriction? What punishment has Congress annexed to treason? |