geeky
As noted in an earlier post in this series, Jefferson was unhappy with a recent decision of the US Supreme Court, Marbury v. Madison, which upheld some of the "midnight judges" appointed by President John Adams after Jefferson had defeated Adams in the election of 1800, but before Jefferson's inauguration in March of 1800. Like some Presidents after, Jefferson was unhappy with the power afforded to the courts and was especially unhappy about some of the judges who rendered rulings unfavorable to his government. Jefferson did not believe that all three branches of government were equal. He saw the judicial branch as the being inferior to the executive and legislative branches, and even to state legislatures.
In the early part of 1805, Kaplan writes at page 202, "Adams and other Federalists were appalled by what suddenly developed as a full-scale attack on the independence of the judiciary." Congress" was dealing with impeachment proceedings against two judges: one, a New Hampshire federal district court judge, and the other a US Supreme Court Justice.
In the case of New Hampshire Judge John Pickering, his removal from office was probably justified. Kaplan describes Pickering as " a mentally unstable alcoholic" who was "incapable of performing his duties." As far as Adams was concerned, the issue was not whether or not Pickering should be removed, but whether there should be some sort of honorable resolution. In Pickering's impeachment trial, the Senate denied him the appointment of counsel, something that Adams considered to be a travesty of justice. He also felt that the charges brought against Pickering were not impeachable offenses. Over two-thirds of the Senate disagreed and Pickering was convicted. More important to Jefferson's supporters was the setting of a precedent for the removal of a judge.
Jefferson's supporters next set their sights on US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. He had been one of the more outspoken critics of Jefferson and his party. The high crimes and misdemeanors that Chase was alleged to have committed included his expression of political views from the bench. Kaplan describes the trial that took place in the Senate in February of 1805 as "high drama". The Senate would not allow Chase to present a defense. He was only allowed to plea. Jefferson's supporters considered impeachment proceedings to be nothing more than a determination by Congress as to whether or not the office holder was fit to hold the office. But Chase's lawyers were able to convince the Senate to reconsider whether or not their client could present a defense. According to John Quincy Adams, in a letter to his father, the prosecution, led by Virginian John Randolph, was badly bungled. Adams wrote to his father as follows:
"A speech of about two hours and a half with as little relation to the subject matter as possible. Without order, connection or argument, consisting altogether of the most hackneyed common-places of popular declamation, mingled up with panegyrics and invectives upon persons, with a few well-expressed ideas, a few striking figures, much distortion of face, and contortion of body, groans, tears and sobs, with occasional pauses for recollection and complaints for having lost his notes." (Kaplan, p. 204)
Chase's response was more reasoned. He told the Senate that if he was to be convicted, it should be on the evidence, not for any other reason. Kaplan comments that at this juncture, the future of the US Supreme Court hung in the balance. Of the 34 Senators voting, 25 were political enemies of Chase, more than the super-majority needed for conviction. But Adams was happy to report to his father that principle prevailed and Chase was acquitted on March 1, 1805, by large margins on many of the counts.
In his 1999 book Grand Inquests: The Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson, the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist noted that many senators declined to convict Chase in spite of their political and personal dislike of him, because they did not believe that the mere quality of his judging was grounds for removal. Thus far in history, Chase had been the only US Supreme Court Justice to have been impeached.