The American impeachment process places in the legislative branch the authority to remove the President, Vice President, and other federal civil officers in the executive and judicial branches upon a determination that such officers have engaged in treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. It is one of the checks and balances grounded in the American constitutional structure. This report summarizes impeachment proceedings in the 111 th Congress, examines relevant constitutional provisions, and provides a brief historical overview. On March 4, 2010, H.Res. 1031 , a resolution "impeaching G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, for high crimes and misdemeanors" and setting forth four articles of impeachment, was reported by the House Judiciary Committee, H.Rept. 111-427 , and placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 170. On March 11, 2010, after one hour of debate, the House voted to impeach Judge Porteous. In four separate unanimous votes, the House agreed to each of the articles of impeachment. Then the impeachment resolution was passed by a voice vote. The Members appointed as House Managers for the Porteous impeachment trial appeared before the Senate to present the impeachment resolution, including the articles of impeachment brought against the judge, on March 17, 2010. The Senate, organized as a Court of Impeachment, then issued a summons to Judge Porteous requiring him to answer the articles brought against him by April 7, 2010, and appointed an Impeachment Trial Committee of 12 Senators to take evidence in the case. The impeachment investigation of Judge Porteous began during the 110 th Congress. On June 17, 2008, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §355(b)(I), the Judicial Conference of the United States certified to the House of Representatives its determination that consideration of impeachment of Judge Porteous may be warranted. On September 17, 2008, the House of Representatives adopted H.Res. 1448 (110 th Congress) directing the House Judiciary Committee to inquire whether the House should impeach him. A Task Force on Judicial Impeachment was established by the House Judiciary Committee to pursue this investigation. The Porteous impeachment investigation was not completed during the 110 th Congress. Because the House of Representatives is not a continuing body, in order for the House Judiciary Committee to continue its impeachment investigation in the 111 th Congress, the House had to take action to renew the House Judiciary Committee's authority. On January 13, 2009, the House passed H.Res. 15 , giving the House Judiciary Committee authority to continue this investigation in the 111 th Congress. The Task Force on Judicial Impeachment, reestablished by the House Judiciary Committee on January 22, 2009, continued its investigation of Judge Porteous's conduct. On January 21, 2010, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr., on behalf of himself, Ranking Member Lamar Smith, and all of the Members of the House Judiciary Committee's Task Force on Judicial Impeachment, introduced H.Res. 1031 . The measure was referred the House Judiciary Committee the same day. On March 4, 2010, the resolution was reported by the committee and placed on the House Calendar. On March 11, 2010, the House voted to impeach Judge Porteous, and approved four articles of impeachment by four unanimous votes. The House then approved H.Res. 1165 , appointing Representative Schiff, Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, Representative Johnson of Georgia, Representative Goodlatte, and Representative Sensenbrenner to be Managers on the part of the House to conduct the impeachment trial on its behalf in the Senate. In addition, H.Res. 1165 provided "that a message be sent to the Senate to inform the Senate of these appointments, and that the managers on the part of the House may exhibit the articles of impeachment to the Senate and take all other actions necessary in connection with preparation for, and conduct of, the trial." On March 17, 2010, the House Managers appeared before the bar of the Senate to present the impeachment resolution and exhibit the articles of impeachment against Judge Porteous. After organizing as a Court of Impeachment, the Senate agreed to two resolutions. S.Res. 457 directed the Sergeant at Arms to serve upon Judge Porteous a summons requiring him to answer the articles against him by April 7, 2010. The judge's answer was filed on that date. Under this resolution, the House Managers had until April 21, 2010, to respond to Judge Porteous's answer with their replication. Their replication was filed with the Senate on April 15, 2010. In a letter filed in the Senate on April 21, 2010, and served upon Judge Porteous's counsel the same day, the House Managers made four corrections to the replication. Pursuant to Rule XI of the "Rules of Procedure and Practice in the Senate when Sitting on Impeachment Trials," the second resolution, S.Res. 458 , created an Impeachment Trial Committee to receive and report evidence in the impeachment trial of Judge Porteous. Upon the recommendations of the majority leader and the minority leader, the presiding officer appointed Senators McCaskill, Klobuchar, Whitehouse, Udall of New Mexico, Shaheen, Kaufman, Hatch, Barrasso, DeMint, Johanns, Risch, and Wicker to be members of this committee. Senator McCaskill will serve as chairman of the committee, while Senator Hatch will serve as vice chairman. The Senate Impeachment Trial Committee held its organizational meeting on April 13, 2010. Pursuant to the rules that govern impeachment trials before the Senate, the Impeachment Trial Committee, after completing its work, submitted a certified record of its proceedings to the Senate and filed its report summarizing the articles of impeachment and the evidence received. In making its determinations in an impeachment trial, the full Senate may rely upon the evidence collected by a Senate Impeachment Trial Committee or may gather further evidence. In this case, the Senate relied upon the Impeachment Trial Committee's evidence and report. In addition, the Senate reviewed the post-trial filings of the House of Representatives and Judge Porteous. The determination whether to convict or acquit on any article rests with the full Senate, as does the determination, upon conviction, of the judgment to be imposed. The Constitution limits a judgment upon conviction in an impeachment trial to removal or removal and disqualification from holding further federal offices. On December 7, 2010, the full Senate heard oral arguments from the parties on pending motions and on the merits of the case. At the conclusion of final arguments presented by the House Managers and Judge Porteous, the Senate cleared the Senate Chamber and went into closed door deliberations on the motions and the articles of impeachment brought against Judge Porteous. On December 8, 2010, the Senate voted to convict Judge Porteous on each of the four articles of impeachment. The vote to convict on article I was unanimous, by a vote of 96 to 0. He was convicted on article II by a vote of 69 to 27. On article III, Judge Porteous was convicted by a vote of 88 to 8. The vote to convict on article IV was 90 to 6. By virtue of having been convicted on these articles, Judge Porteous was removed from office. In rare additional judgment, the Senate, by a vote of 94 to 2, voted to disqualify Judge Porteous from holding any future federal office. The impeachment investigation with respect to Judge Porteous is one of two impeachment inquiries regarding federal judges undertaken in the 111 th Congress. On June 14, 2009, the House of Representatives impeached Judge Samuel B. Kent of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. On June 19, 2009, the House adopted H.Res. 520 (111 th Congress), impeaching Judge Kent and setting forth four articles of impeachment. Five days later, the House Managers presented H.Res. 520 to the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment. Then the Senate, acting in that capacity, pursuant to S.Res. 202 , issued a summons to Judge Kent directing him to respond to the articles of impeachment against him by July 2, 2009. The same day, pursuant to S.Res. 203 , the Senate appointed a committee of 12 Senators to receive and report evidence with respect to these articles of impeachment under Rule XI of the Senate Rules When Sitting on an Impeachment Trial. When served with the summons, Judge Kent tendered a letter of resignation from the federal bench to take effect on June 30, 2009. On June 29, 2009, counsel to the President accepted Judge Kent's resignation on behalf of President Obama. On July 20, 2009, the House agreed to H.Res. 661 , instructing the House Managers to appear before the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, and "advise the Senate that, because Samuel B. Kent is no longer a civil officer of the United States, the House of Representatives does not desire further to urge the articles of impeachment hitherto filed in the Senate against Samuel B. Kent." The Senate agreed to a motion to dismiss the articles of impeachment against former Judge Kent on July 22, 2009. Authority to remove the President, Vice President, and federal civil officers by impeachment has been placed, by constitutional mandate, in the hands of the legislative branch of the United States government. Although rooted in the soil of English impeachment experience, the American impeachment system differs from its English forebear in some significant respects. Recorded incidents of English impeachments may begin as early as 1376, and one source would place the first in 1283. A more fixed procedure appears to have begun in 1399, with the passage of the statute of I Henry IV, c. 14. Whichever date one chooses, it is clear that the English practice took root well before the colonial beginnings of the United States. It ceased to be used in England at about the time that it became part of the American system of government.