Under The Texas Constitution Who Has The Power Of Impeachment

Under the Texas Constitution, the power of impeachment is a critical mechanism for holding public officials accountable. This power is divided between the House of Representatives and the Senate, each playing a distinct role in the process. Understanding the nuances of this constitutional framework is essential for comprehending the checks and balances within the Texas government. The impeachment process, the officials subject to it, and the grounds for impeachment are all defined by the Texas Constitution, ensuring a structured and fair approach to addressing misconduct in public office.

The Impeachment Process in Texas

The impeachment process in Texas is a two-step procedure, involving both the House of Representatives and the Senate. This division of power ensures a thorough review of any allegations against a public official before they can be removed from office.

Step 1: House of Representatives - Presenting the Articles of Impeachment

The first step in the impeachment process begins with the Texas House of Representatives. According to the Texas Constitution, the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment. This means that any impeachment proceedings must originate in the House.

• Initiation: Any member of the House can introduce a resolution calling for the impeachment of a state official. This resolution typically includes specific charges or allegations of misconduct.
• Investigation: Once a resolution is introduced, the House may conduct an investigation to gather evidence related to the charges. This investigation can involve committees, special investigators, and the subpoena of witnesses and documents.
• Vote: After the investigation, the House must vote on the articles of impeachment. A simple majority vote (more than 50%) is required to impeach an official. If the House votes to impeach, it adopts articles of impeachment, which are formal charges against the official.

Step 2: The Senate - Trying the Impeachment

Once the House of Representatives impeaches an official, the process moves to the Texas Senate. The Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments.

• Trial: The Senate conducts a trial, similar to a court proceeding. The impeached official has the right to be represented by counsel, present evidence, and cross-examine witnesses.
• Presiding Officer: The Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court presides over the impeachment trial, unless the Governor is being tried, in which case the Lieutenant Governor presides.
• Vote: After hearing the evidence, the Senate votes on each article of impeachment. A two-thirds majority vote of the Senators present is required to convict an official. If convicted, the official is removed from office.

Key Differences Between House and Senate Roles

Officials Subject to Impeachment

The Texas Constitution specifies which officials are subject to impeachment. Understanding who can be impeached is vital to ensuring accountability within the government.

List of Impeachable Officials

According to the Texas Constitution, the following officials can be impeached:

• The Governor: The chief executive of the state, responsible for implementing laws and overseeing the executive branch.
• The Lieutenant Governor: The second-highest executive officer, who serves as the President of the Senate and assumes the duties of the Governor when the Governor is absent or incapacitated.
• The Attorney General: The state's chief legal officer, responsible for representing the state in legal matters and providing legal advice to state agencies.
• The Comptroller of Public Accounts: The state's chief financial officer, responsible for collecting taxes, managing state funds, and providing financial information to the legislature.
• The Land Commissioner: Manages state-owned lands and mineral rights, generating revenue for the state's Permanent School Fund.
• Judges of the Supreme Court: The highest appellate court in the state for civil matters.
• Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals: The highest appellate court in the state for criminal matters.
• Judges of the Courts of Appeals: Intermediate appellate courts that hear appeals from trial courts.
• Judges of the District Courts: Trial courts with general jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases.

Rationale for Including Specific Officials

The inclusion of these specific officials is based on their significant roles and responsibilities within the Texas government. These positions hold considerable power and influence, making it essential to have a mechanism for holding them accountable for their actions. By including these officials in the impeachment process, the Texas Constitution aims to prevent abuse of power and maintain integrity in government.

Grounds for Impeachment

The Texas Constitution also outlines the grounds for impeachment. Understanding what constitutes an impeachable offense is crucial for determining whether an official's conduct warrants removal from office.

Definition of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors"

The Texas Constitution specifies that the grounds for impeachment are for "high crimes and misdemeanors." However, it does not provide a precise definition of these terms. As a result, the interpretation of what constitutes an impeachable offense is often left to the discretion of the House and Senate.

• High Crimes: Generally refers to serious criminal offenses that violate the law.
• Misdemeanors: Often interpreted to include serious misconduct, abuse of power, or neglect of duty that undermines public trust.

Examples of Impeachable Offenses

While the Texas Constitution does not provide an exhaustive list, examples of conduct that could potentially lead to impeachment include:

• Bribery: Accepting or offering bribes in exchange for official actions.
• Perjury: Lying under oath.
• Obstruction of Justice: Interfering with legal proceedings.
• Abuse of Power: Using official authority for personal gain or to harm others.
• Gross Neglect of Duty: Failing to perform official responsibilities.
• Official Oppression: When an official under the color of his office, unlawfully and with evil intent, either inflicts any bodily injury or subjects any person to false imprisonment or any other corporeal grievance.
• Intoxication: Texas Penal Code Section 49.01 defines intoxication as: (1) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or (2) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

Importance of Interpretation

The interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" is critical because it determines the scope of the impeachment power. A broad interpretation could allow for impeachment based on a wide range of conduct, while a narrow interpretation could limit the impeachment power to only the most serious offenses. The House and Senate must carefully consider the specific facts and circumstances of each case when determining whether an official's conduct meets the threshold for impeachment.

Historical Impeachments in Texas

Throughout Texas history, there have been a few notable instances of impeachment proceedings. Examining these cases provides valuable insights into how the impeachment process has been used in practice and the impact it has had on the state government.

James E. Ferguson

One of the most famous impeachment cases in Texas history is that of Governor James E. Ferguson in 1917. Ferguson was impeached by the House of Representatives on multiple charges, including:

• Misapplication of public funds
• Receiving personal loans from banks that did business with the state
• Obstructing the investigation into his conduct

The Senate convicted Ferguson on several of the charges, removing him from office and barring him from holding future office in Texas. This case set a significant precedent for the use of the impeachment power in Texas.

Other Notable Cases

While the Ferguson case is the most well-known, there have been other instances of impeachment proceedings in Texas history. Although few have resulted in convictions, they demonstrate the use of the impeachment process as a check on government officials.

• Judge O.P. Carrillo (1975): Judge Carrillo was a state district judge who was impeached due to charges that involved abuse of power. Carrillo was found guilty in the Texas Senate and therefore was removed from his position.

Lessons Learned

These historical cases offer several important lessons about the impeachment process in Texas:

• Seriousness of the Charges: Impeachment is typically reserved for serious misconduct that undermines public trust and confidence in government.
• Political Considerations: Impeachment proceedings can be highly political, with partisan considerations often playing a role in the outcome.
• Impact on Governance: Impeachment can have a significant impact on the functioning of government, particularly if it leads to the removal of key officials.

The Role of Public Opinion

Public opinion can play a significant role in the impeachment process. While the decision to impeach and convict an official ultimately rests with the House and Senate, public pressure can influence their actions.

Influence on Legislators

Legislators are elected officials who are accountable to their constituents. Public opinion can influence their decisions on whether to support impeachment or conviction. If there is strong public demand for accountability, legislators may be more likely to take action against an official accused of misconduct.

Media Coverage

Media coverage can also shape public opinion and influence the impeachment process. Extensive media coverage of allegations against an official can increase public awareness and create pressure for action. The way the media frames the issues and presents the evidence can significantly impact public perceptions.

Limitations of Public Opinion

While public opinion can be influential, it also has limitations. The impeachment process is a legal and constitutional process that must be based on evidence and due process. Public opinion should not be the sole basis for impeachment or conviction. Legislators must carefully consider the facts and the law, even if it means going against public sentiment.

Safeguards and Limitations

The Texas Constitution includes several safeguards and limitations on the impeachment power to prevent abuse and protect the rights of accused officials.

Due Process Rights

Accused officials have the right to due process, including the right to:

• Be informed of the charges against them
• Be represented by counsel
• Present evidence in their defense
• Cross-examine witnesses

These rights ensure that the impeachment process is fair and that officials are not unjustly removed from office.

Supermajority Requirement in the Senate

The requirement of a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate to convict an official provides an additional safeguard against partisan or politically motivated impeachments. This high threshold ensures that there is broad consensus before an official is removed from office.

Judicial Review

The Texas Constitution does not explicitly provide for judicial review of impeachment proceedings. However, some legal scholars argue that the courts may have the power to review impeachment proceedings to ensure that they comply with constitutional requirements.

Conclusion

The power of impeachment under the Texas Constitution is a critical mechanism for holding public officials accountable and maintaining integrity in government. The division of power between the House of Representatives and the Senate, along with the safeguards and limitations included in the Constitution, ensures a structured and fair process. By understanding the nuances of the impeachment process, the officials subject to it, and the grounds for impeachment, citizens can play an informed role in ensuring accountability in their government. The historical examples of impeachment proceedings in Texas demonstrate the importance of this power and the impact it can have on the state's governance.