Event Explains Ethics of Impeachment

The process, history and ethics of President Trump’s ongoing impeachment

The Markkula Center for Applied Ethics hosted a discussion of ethical considerations in the Senate trial of President Trump.

The event was held on Jan. 21 at 5:30 p.m. in the Library Media Room A where students came to hear Santa Clara professors speak.

Mariana Perera is a Santa Clara senior and current Hackworth Fellow for The Markkula Center. 

Perera said her goal for the event was to get more students invovled in politics “and more students educat[ed] about political things that are going on.” 

“But talking about them more from an ethical point of view rather than a very political and angry way,” she added.

The late Hana Callaghan was the Director of Government Ethics at The Markkula Center. 

She mentored Perera and helped her put the event together.

The professors who spoke were Matthew Harrigan and Anne Baker of the political science department and David DeCosse, the Director of Campus Ethics Programs at the Markkula Center.

Harrigan started the discussion by describing the impeachment timeline and its origin as stated in the Constitution.

 He specifically looked at Article I, which enumerates the powers of the legislative branch, and Article II, which describes the powers of the executive branch, of the Constitution to describe the impeachment process, which begins in the House of Representatives.

First, the House subcommittee must vote on articles of impeachment, which are then sent to the rest of the House for a full floor vote. 

Once passed, as in the case of Trump on Dec. 18, 2019, the House sends its articles of impeachment to the Senate.

In the upper chamber of Congress, senators become “jurors” and impeachment managers—made up of respresentatives from the House—act as prosecution, while the president’s lawyers provide defense. 

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over this Senate trial. 

To remove the president, 66 senators must vote to convict.

Baker followed with a presentation on the history of the impeachment process.

She talked about past presidents who have been either impeached or threatened with impeachment—including Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton—and the ethics surrounding this tactic. 

She used this information to explain the impeachment of President Trump. 

She said that while the charges mention the oath of office described in Article I, it is not central to the argument. 

And that acquittal will not be given just because of partisan beliefs.

“It is also because the Senate has this historical preference for very clear cut legal violations,” Baker said. “And it does not have a real precedent for punishing violations of the oath of office.”

Lastly, DeCosse spoke about the strong and weak views of the Senate impeachment oath. These views gave an understanding of the ethics of the impeachment trial, impartiality, its meaning and ethical examples of impartiality. 

DeCosse analyzed different texts like Federalist Paper No.65 by Alexander Hamilton to find specifications of ethical examples of impartiality. 

Mariana closed the discussion with three discussion questions and many students replied with their opinions on the topics.

Senior Miguel Asturias found the event to be very insightful and informative, especially during this election year.

“Learning about the ethics and precedent of impeachment is very important just to be informed on the process,” Asturias said, “and not just say things based on what we here on the news, but things that we hear from experts like our professors.”

Contact Nisha Shankar at nshankar@scu.edu or call (408) 554-4852.