Document: 506 U.S. 224 113 S.Ct. 732 122 L.Ed.2d 1 Walter L. NIXON, Petitionerv.UNITED STATES et al. No. 91-740. Argued Oct. 14, 1992. Decided Jan. 13, 1993. Syllabus * After petitioner Nixon, the Chief Judge of a Federal District Court, was convicted federal crimes and sentenced to prison, House Representatives adopted articles impeachment against him presented them Senate. Following proceedings pursuant Senate Rule XI—which allows committee Senators hear evidence an impeached individual report that full Senate—the voted convict presiding officer entered judgment removing from his judgeship. He then commenced present suit for declaratory reinstatement judicial salary privileges, arguing that, because XI prohibits whole taking part in evidentiary hearings, it violates first sentence Constitution's Impeachment Trial Clause, Art. I, § 3, cl. 6, which provides "Senate shall have sole Power try all Impeachments." The Court held claim nonjusticiable, i.e., involved political question could not be resolved by courts. Appeals affirmed. Held: Nixon's Clause is nonjusticiable. Pp. ____. (a) A controversy nonjusticiable where there "a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment issue coordinate department; or lack judicially discoverable manageable standards resolving . ." Baker v. Carr, 369 186, 217, 82 691, 710, 7 663. These two concepts are completely separate; may strengthen conclusion branch. (b) language structure demonstrate textual argument use word "try" Clause's impliedly requires judicial-style trial subject review rejected. lacks sufficient precision afford any standard compelled older modern dictionary definitions, fortified existence three very specific requirements second third sentences do impose—that Senate's members must under oath affirmation, two-thirds vote required convict, Justice presides when President tried—the precise nature suggests Framers did intend impose additional limitations on form proceedings. instead read as grant authority determine whether should acquitted convicted, common sense meanings "sole" indicate this reposed alone. attempts negate significance unavailing, while alternative reading requiring only unnatural would procedural inconsistent with express sets out. Constitutional Convention's history contemporary commentary supports deliberately placing power Legislature, no involvement, even limited purpose review. (c) Justiciability also refuted (1) finality inherent exposing country's life particularly if were impeached—to months, perhaps years, chaos during proceedings, retrial differently constituted might conduct its conviction invalidated, (2) difficulty fashioning relief other than simply setting aside conviction. See Baker, supra, U.S., at 210, S.Ct., 706. (d) holding nonjusticiability consistent Court's opinion Powell McCormack, 395 486, 89 1944, 23 491. Unlike situation case, separate provision defeated allowing final meaning 6. While courts possess legislative action transgresses identifiable limits, does provide such limit committed 290 U.S.App.D.C. 420, 938 F.2d 239, REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, JJ., joined. J., filed concurring opinion. WHITE, judgment, BLACKMUN, SOUTER, judgment. David O. Stewart, Washington, D.C., petitioner. Solicitor Gen. Kenneth W. Starr, respondent. REHNQUIST Court. Petitioner Jr., asks court decide XI, who has been Senate, That But before we reach merits claim, "justiciable," is, We conclude not. 2 former United States Southern Mississippi, jury counts making false statements grand prison. 816 1022 (CA5 1987). investigation stemmed reports Nixon had accepted gratuity Mississippi businessman exchange asking local district attorney halt prosecution businessman's son. Because refused resign office Judge, he continued collect serving out prison sentence. H.R.Rep. 101-36, p. 13 (1989). 3 On May 10, 1989, high misdemeanors. charged giving testimony article bringing disrepute Judiciary. 135 Cong.Rec. H1811. 4 invoke own appoints "receive take testimony." reprinted Manual, S. Doc. 101-1, 101st Cong., 1st Sess., 186 (1989).1 four days 10 witnesses, including testified. S.Rep. 101-164, Pursuant complete transcript proceeding stating uncontested facts summarizing contested facts. id., 3-4. managers submitted extensive briefs arguments floor hours set oral front body. himself gave personal appeal, several posed questions directly both parties. S14493-14517 (Nov. 1, 1989). more constitutionally majority articles. Id., S14635 Judge. 5 thereafter suit, impeachments hearings. sought void privileges reinstated. 744 F.Supp. 9 (D.C.1990), Columbia Circuit agreed. 239 (1991). 6 nonjusticiable—i.e., involves question—where it. 663 (1962). must, instance, interpret text what extent committed. ibid.; 519, 1962-1963, 491 (1969). As discussion follows makes clear, concept department it; In examine scope conferred upon regarding impeachment. It provides: 8 "The Impeachments. When sitting Purpose, they Oath Affirmation. tried, preside: And Person without Concurrence thirds Members present." revealing. indicates nowhere else. next specify conform: tried preside. argues imposes implication requirement trial. From goes argue limitation precludes delegating select task hearing done XI. " '[T]ry' means 'vote on' 'review' 'judge.' 1787 today, trying case evidence, scanning cold record." Brief 25. concludes "tried" convicting him. 11 There difficulties position lead us ultimately reject "try," later, considerably broader those Older dictionaries define "[t]o examine" judge." Johnson, Dictionary English Language (1785). usage term various meanings. For example, can mean "to investigate judicially," of," put test experiment, investigation, trial." Webster's Third New International 2457 (1971). submits contained T. Sheridan, (1796), judge; bring tribunal." Based variety however, cannot say used implied method proceed impeachments. "As rule Constitution speaks general terms, leaving Congress deal subsidiary matters detail public interests changing conditions require. Dillon Gloss, 256 368, 376, 41 510, 512-513, 65 L.Ed. 994 (1921). 12 actions impeachments: oath, tried. quite precise, their devotes pages brief negating noted above, "[t]he think considerable significance. Indeed, appears one time Constitution—with respect Representatives' "sole Impeachment." 2, (emphasis added). alone convicted. definition bears "Sole" defined "having companion," "solitary," "being one," "functioning independently assistance interference." 2168 If order body official, difficult see how 14 asserts substantive meaning. To support contention, nothing mere "cosmetic edit" added Committee Style after delegates approved substance Clause. argument. First, accepting proposition Convention alter Records 1787, 553 (M. Farrand ed. 1966) (hereinafter Farrand), presume Committee's reorganization rephrasing accurately captured meant unadorned language. 538-539, 1972-1973. job. This presumption buttressed fact on, accepted, Style's linguistic version. 663-667. agree Government "the 'sole' entitled less weight text, revision perfected 'had agreed to.' Respondents Second, carrying logical constrain last draft govern every instance arguably word. Such result odds passed version, well established plain enacted best indicator intent. 15 contends bear justiciability II, grants pardon "except Cases President's necessary thought questions. granting overturning some tribunal; "[a]n executive mitigates punishment crime." Black's Law 1113 (6th 1990) Authority procedures unreviewable courts, therefore official. exception cases determination clemency available cases. 16 finally attributed clause, granted Senate—not lay jury, impeachments." 42. possible way, but natural reading. Petitioner's interpretation into purview merely sort made petitioner, similar claims based "Senate" imposed adopt. construction whole, which, noted, sentences. 17 understanding provisions our parties offer single alludes possibility context powers. U.S.App.D.C., 424, 243; R. Berger, Impeachment: Problems 116 (1973). silence meaningful light explicit references availability check Legislature's bills attainder, ex post facto laws, statutes. Federalist 78, 524 (J. Cooke 1961) ("Limitations preserved practice way through medium justice"). 18 labored over lie. Significantly, least considered scenarios placed 21-22 (Virginia Plan); 244 (New Jersey Plan). Madison Detail proposed Supreme 551 (Madison); 178-179, (Committee Detail). Despite these proposals, decided Try According Alexander Hamilton, "most fit depositary important trust" representatives people. 65, 440 1961). proper "doubted tribunal would, times, endowed so eminent portion fortitude called execution task" "would degree credit authority" carry conflicted accusation brought Legislature—the people's representative. 441. addition, believed too small number: awful discretion, necessarily have, doom honor infamy most confidential distinguished characters community, forbids trust number persons." 441-442. 19 reasons why Judiciary, particular, chosen role recognized likely individuals commit impeachable offenses—the criminal fact, explicitly 7. separated forums avoid raising specter bias ensure independent judgments: 20 "Would persons, disposed fame valuable rights citizen trial, another same offence, disposers fortune? Would greatest reason apprehend, error parent sentence? strong decision apt overrule influence new lights, vary complexion decision?" 442 21 [[DCQ!]] Certainly "trial" introduce risk participation itself. 22 Framers' insistence system checks balances. system, designed Judicial Branch Legislature. topic accountability, Hamilton wrote: precautions responsibility comprised respecting They liable mal-conduct house representatives, senate, dismissed disqualified other. point, independence character, find constitution judges." 79, pp. 532-533 24 involvement purposes review, counterintuitive eviscerate "important check" Judiciary Framers. 81, 545. place reviewing hands process regulate.2 25 Nevertheless, fears given grave will usurp power. anticipated objection created safeguards keep check. safeguard divided between bodies, right accuse judge. 66, 446. split "avoids inconvenience persons accusers judges; guards danger persecution prevalency factious spirit either branches." supermajority requirement. explained "[a]s concurrence senate requisite condemnation, security innocence, circumstance, itself desire." Ibid. 26 addition argument, persuaded counsel justiciability. opening door "expose country chaos." 427, F.2d, 246. manifest dramatically impeached. legitimacy successor, hence effectiveness, impaired severely, running course, invalidated. Equally uncertain give Could judge, create judgeship seat filled interim? 27 reconciled relevant "unqualified" sit Member accused misappropriating funds abusing York stated turned judge members' qualifications, so, commitment. 521, 1963-1964. Article "Each Elections, Returns Qualifications Members." turn, specifies membership House: candidate years age, seven inhabitant State represent. specified Constitution, "qualifications"—of —was nature. 522, 1964; 60, 409 ("The qualifications choose chosen, remarked occasion, fixed constitution; unalterable legislature.") added) (quoted Powell, 539, 1973). 28 Our "[q]ualifications" forth 2. "be Members" specifying membership. member satisfied House, consisted 29 us, limits. "whether [either Legislative Executive Branch] exceeds whatever committed, delicate exercise interpretation, ultimate interpreter Constitution." 211, 706; accord, conclude, exercising responsibility, 30 foregoing reasons, 31 Affirmed. 32 concurring. 33 me, debate about strength inferences drawn words far significant central assign Branch. disposition Samuel Chase 1805 demonstrated fully conscious profound importance assignment, subsequent extraordinary otherwise. generally A. Beveridge, Life John Marshall 169-222 (1919); Rehnquist, Grand Inquests 275-278 (1992). Respect forecloses assumption improbable hypotheticals like mentioned WHITE SOUTER ever occur. Accordingly, wise policy restraint, coupled potential anomalies associated contrary view, ante ____, justification my agreement views THE CHIEF JUSTICE. 34 whom BLACKMUN joins, 35 mandates view consider contention. I prohibition claim. concur fulfilled obligation 36 said outset practical matter, make little difference controls case. wide discretion extremely unlikely abuse insist procedure deemed reasonable judges. Even wholly approach, prefer announce ignore direction asked if, impeach, whatsoever, unanimously found guilty being bad guy," answered Government's theory "leads me answer yes." Tr.Oral Arg. 51. Especially advice General, invitation excuse, name pressing business, dismissive critical process. 37 Practicalities aside, since issue, disagreement stated. II 38 states raised meets criteria 'a department.' finds standards.' Ante, 39 Of course doctrine commits exclusive particular governmental function branches. numerous instances commitment, e.g., 8, disputes implicating Rather, branches interpreting 40 Although directs search commitment" few, any, unequivocal Conferral "Judge" may, preclude prospective qualifications. 548, 1978, usually left infer presence Constitution. drawing inference interpretive branches, sometimes aided judiciary review—a inquiry expressed Baker's "lack standards" criterion. See, Coleman Miller, 307 433, 452-454, 59 972, 981-982, 83 1385 (1939), span amendment V's placement question. 457-460, 983-985 (Black, concurring). clear phrase attributes "considerable significance" passage (the "shall Impeachment"). sparing employment demonstrates concern 42 disagreeing note General "[w]e don't rest submission try." 32; advised respect. lies infrequency appears, exactly twice, parallel concerning Clauses emphasize distinct each notes, Framers, following practice, much concerned prosecutorial adjudicative aspects ____ (citing 446 1961)). Giving effected division labor. thus ought 'functio[n] interference,' ante, wrongly identifies judiciary, rather source interference employed "sole." 43 regard companion willingness abandon constitutionality acts perplexing. Consider, comparison, treatment "All powers" "all" nearly synonymous "sole"—both connote entire authority. Yet never unduly interfere operation entertain Quite opposite, falls within province judiciary. Addressing veto, "[e]xplicit unambiguous [that] prescribe respective functions process." INS Chadha, 462 919, 945, 103 2764, 2781, 77 317 (1983). 44 early interpretations Clauses, noting current powerfully Nos. 66. materials doubt came officials' misdeeds conducted people; fledgling lacked wherewithal adjudicate intrigues; emanating them; reside largely unaccountable 45 majority's historical record explains properly resides explain, sweeping statement "not impeachments."1 Not cited addresses glance surrounding negates attempt 46 What mainly reveals deep ambivalence among many institution impeachment, nature, easily clearly recognized, branch possessed impeachments, having branch, holds potentially unanswerable others. insofar own, advantage causes. 47 surprise, then, greatly vexed debates reveal diverse plans exceedingly issue. P. Hoffer & N. Hull, America, 1635-1805, 97-106 (1984) (discussing proposals). Both convention, maintained 74, 98, 100. Shortly thereafter, devised complicated scheme 74-75. Jefferson likewise attempted develop interbranch trials Virginia. 71-72. Hamilton's eloquent defense pragmatic further cause ratification belief superiority vesting Convention, advocated up state 292-293 1966). Four months publishing urged Ratifying amend ably defended judges jointly Papers 167-168 (H. Syrett 1962). 48 above else deeply "awful have." 441 Viewed history, discord basic principles balances underlying separation powers clear. essence, tool dominance yet rendered Congress' few areas immune rejects petitioner's espousing "inconsistent balances," finding truly upsets careful design. balanced serve controlling adhered minimal conducting trials. B 49 standard. notes refer proceeding, or, generally, experimentation investigation. term's multiple senses, unable "an Also according majority, comparison listed Clause—that senators preside President—indicates constitute unmanageability. 50 apparently basis distinguishes argued precluded House's contrary, although leaves Congress, enumerates, "qualifications" whose absence adjudge. precisely business concluded, constitutionally-specified 1964. different grounds whereas readily susceptible "identifiable Senate." 51 comes variants. first, ascertain undertake untenable. begin with, intuitively expect defining official wrongdoing, legal sense. intuition borne reflection alternatives. clause seriously "attempt" "experiment with" equally implausible "investigating" description substantially overlap draw 5. alternatives realistic possibilities evidenced ("[w]hen ."), III, ("[t]he Crimes, except ."). 52 variant focuses creates limit." Yet, conceded hardly elusive Tr. Oral 51-52. Were adopt automatically entering whenever failed impeachments.2 52. Indeed respect, presents greater, fewer, amenable familiar techniques construction, including, "Commerce States," "due law." Amdt. 5; Gibbons Ogden, Wheat. 189, (1824) regulated commerce; enumeration, definition, power, becomes settle word"); Mathews Eldridge, 424 319, 334, 96 893, 902, (1976) (" ' "[D]ue process," unlike rules, technical conception content unrelated time, circumstances' ") (quoting Cafeteria Workers McElroy, 367 886, 895, 81 1743, 1748, 1230 (1961)).3 III 53 incapable irony. One class fall definitional abilities justice. Examination remaining question—whether accordance compatible Clause—confirms intuition. 54 substantial burden demonstrating employing relying fact-finding committee. model Convention. Hence manner somewhat resembling proceeding. safe assume follow England States, contemplated formal charges, represented counsel, presented, opportunity heard. 55 argues, committees prior interpreted permit use. leap device parliamentary forever barred undermines 56 specifically exempts anxious "try." Contemporaneous view. stressed large (which promised boast members) necessitated tied down strict delineation offence prosecutors, Judges. analysis Story offered identical analysis, worth quoting length. 57 "[I]t obvious, strictness forms offences law ill adapted habits growing employments; rigid manner, limited, fenced sides, protect rules precedents; adherence principles, perhaps, law, other, offences, broad observed great propriety, liberal comprehensive confined, possible, forms, enabled continue session long require, qualified charge bearings dependencies, appropriate sound defence accused, seems indispensable value justifies remark. mode proceeding; charges sufficiently form; exceptions, arise application grow quibbles. repeatedly seen, better understood, liberally justly expounded statesmen, lawyers." J. Story, Commentaries 765, 532 (3d 1858). 58 noteworthy delegation quasi-judicial bodies unknown Jefferson, least, aware Lords delegated recommended Manual Parliamentary Practice Use LIII (2d 1812) swear witnesses open there: named, Jefferson's Writings, Thomas Second Series (W. Howell 1988). occasion 29, 33. More colonial governments legislatures, contemnors appeared them. Groppi Leslie, 404 496, 501, 92 582, 585, 632 (1972). appointed special masters finders "[f]rom commencement Government." Ex parte Peterson, 253 300, 312, 543, 547, 64 919 (1920). Particularly "determine Rules Proceedings," 5, strongly prevent factfinding short, bind beyond establishing procedures. Without identifying exact contours procedures, entirely command "try challenge fail. IV 60 trial; refuses laudable desire legislature. Regrettably, manifested needless violence Constitution.4 deference owed itself, ample 61 62 differs Court's, 63 cautioned 210-211, 706-707, (1962), 'political question' label" tends obscure need case-by-case inquiry." close examination nevertheless precedents, functional posture case," "resolution semantic cataloguing," 710: "Prominent surface involve impossibility deciding initial kind nonjudicial discretion; court's undertaking resolution expressing due government; unusual unquestioning already made; potentiality embarrassment multifarious pronouncements departments question." Whatever considerations feature prominently "essentially powers," ibid., existing restrain "from inappropriate Government," Munoz-Flores, 495 385, 394, 110 1964, 1970, 109 384 (1990), deriving prudential concerns owe departments. Goldwater Carter, 444 996, 1000, 100 533, 535, 428 (1979) (Powell, judgment); Bickel, Least Dangerous 125-126 1986); Finkelstein, Self-Limitation, Harv.L.Rev. 338, 344-345 (1924). disrespectful, turns, Learned Hand it, "how importunately demands answer." Hand, Bill Rights (1958). 66 demand answer. Impeachments," requirements: affirmation; tried; present. Const., fair contemplates determine, boundaries, issues receipt consideration satisfy duty Other confirm question: "unusual made," 710. observes, circumstances entail disruption government. 67 can, nevertheless, envision justify searching act threatening integrity results, convicting, say, coin-toss, summary guy,' (WHITE, judgment), appropriate. circumstances, authority, consequent impact Republic great, merit response despite ordinarily silence. doctrine, maintenance order, applied promote disorder." 215, 709. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 499. Specifically, "[I]n Presiding Officer orders, appoint receive times places chairman thereof, elected committee, (unless otherwise ordered Senate) respectively, "Unless appointed. writing certified copy received taken intents purposes, competency, relevancy, materiality, herein sending witness hang Judiciary's interest implicated affected support, cites decisions Mistretta 488 361, 647, 102 714 (1989) Morrison Olson, 487 654, 108 2597, 101 569 (1988). advance neither addressed importantly, remove latter contention belied designates President. rejoinder example below, postulates "monstrous hypothetical abuse." 246 unlikelihood realized undermine point definable regarded manageable. terrorem national fashion effective relief—merits attention. typical render dysfunctional litigation. Moreover, capacity rejected Powell. 549, unconstitutional presumably unfairly employee-litigants. Finally, President, points crisis result. refrain upholding Nor Presidential Justices responsibilities precipitated crisis. produce results cases, version SOUTER. unacceptably work avoided threat harm order. articulated, missing premise: explanation show disrespect opposed to, enactment legislation Commerce validity statutes challenged, though laws firm constitutional. kind, attendant disrespect, conditioned showing risk. Some account needed prudence event, achieve purpose. wishes avoid—and embarrassment—will inevitably cast still distinguish merits. "[i]t conclude," post, words, preliminary acted "broad boundaries" concluded determination. At best, approach offers illusion substituting impressionistic assessment analysis.

Category: 8