Xem How does this resolution demonstrate the principle of checks and balances? 2024
In this Presidents and the Constitution eLesson we examine how the conflict between Andrew Johnson and the Congress regarding reconstruction plans after the Civil War led to the nation’s first impeachment of a President. This trial was a test of the constitutional principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. In the end, the Founders’ mechanism of three co-equal branches of government proved strong enough to resolve the crisis.
Narrative
When Andrew Johnson took the oath of office following Lincoln’s death on April 15, 1865, he saw his main task as “restoration” of the states to the Union as quickly and leniently as possible. The Thirteenth Amendment banned slavery nationally as of December of that year, but states were in control of the rights of the freedmen.
Congress was dominated by Republicans, and no states from the former Confederacy were represented. The Republicans believed that Congress—not the President—was in charge of a “reconstruction” process. States would return to the Union only after agreeing to a significant shift away from state power to federal control. Congress passed a number of laws protecting freedmen and restricting the powers of the states. Johnson vetoed them, and Congress overrode the vetoes.
The growing tension between Johnson and Congress was reflected in Johnson’s cabinet. (Most of the cabinet members had been appointed by Lincoln.) One of the most influential cabinet members was Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, who strongly opposed Johnson’s lenient approach toward the South. Tired of Stanton’s resistance in his Cabinet, Johnson fired Stanton. This was a violation of the recently enacted Tenure of Office Act, which required the President to seek the Senate’s approval before removing an official whose appointment had required confirmation by the Senate. The power struggle between President and Congress accelerated, and the House of Representatives passed an Impeachment Resolution on February 24, 1868.
The trial before the Senate began on March 30, 1868. The President’s defense team made the following points: 1. The language of the Tenure of Office Act was unclear, leaving doubt about whether it covered Stanton’s situation. Stanton had been appointed by Lincoln, not by Johnson; 2. The Tenure of Office Act interfered with the President’s constitutional power to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” A President cannot carry out the law if he cannot trust his advisers; 3. The proper way to remove a president for political misdeeds was through an election, not impeachment.
The President’s accusers made the following main points: 1. The President had clearly violated the Tenure of Office Act by dismissing Stanton without the consent of the Senate; 2. It is the President’s duty to faithfully execute a law passed by Congress, even if he believes it to be unconstitutional. Otherwise, a President could routinely frustrate the will of the people as expressed by their elected representatives.
The core of the trial was about the Tenure of Office Act, but the issues were much broader than that. Johnson’s accusers argued that not only had he violated the Tenure of Office Act, but also that he represented the return of “Slave Power” to the United States. Johnson’s defenders accused Republicans of using impeachment as a political tool.
Thirty-five Senators voted to convict Johnson, and nineteen voted to acquit. This was one vote short of the two-thirds majority that the Constitution requires to remove a President from office. President Johnson served the remaining ten months of his term as President. He continued to veto bills that he saw as unconstitutional, but he enforced the laws when passed. Congress continued to override the vetoes. When Johnson died of a stroke on July 31, 1875, he was buried as he had requested, wrapped in a U.S. flag, with his head resting on his copy of the U.S. Constitution.
While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions.
Select Citation Style
Copy Citation
Share
Share
Share to social media
Facebook Twitter
URL
https://www.britannica.com/topic/checks-and-balances
Give Feedback
External Websites
Feedback
Corrections? Updates? Omissions? Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login).
Feedback Type
Your Feedback Submit Feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.
External Websites
- Investopedia – Checks and Balances Definition
- Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute – Seperation of Powers and Checks and Balances
Britannica Websites
Articles from Britannica Encyclopedias for elementary and high school students.
- checks and balances – Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
Print Cite
verifiedCite
While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions.
Select Citation Style
Copy CitationShare
Share
Share to social media
Facebook Twitter
URL
https://www.britannica.com/topic/checks-and-balancesFeedback
External Websites
Feedback
Corrections? Updates? Omissions? Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login).
Feedback Type
Your Feedback Submit Feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.
External Websites
- Investopedia – Checks and Balances Definition
- Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute – Seperation of Powers and Checks and Balances
Britannica Websites
Articles from Britannica Encyclopedias for elementary and high school students.
- checks and balances – Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
By The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica Article History
Table of Contents
Related Topics:government heterarchy separation of powers…(Show more)
See all related content →
Summary
Read a brief summary of this topic
checks and balances, principle of government under which separate branches are empowered to prevent actions by other branches and are induced to share power. Checks and balances are applied primarily in constitutional governments. They are of fundamental importance in tripartite governments, such as that of the United States, which separate powers among legislative, executive, and judicial branches.
The Greek historian Polybius analyzed the ancient Roman mixed constitution under three main divisions: monarchy (represented by the consul); aristocracy (the Senate); and democracy (the people). He greatly influenced later ideas about the separation of powers.
Checks and balances, which modify the separation of powers, may operate under parliamentary systems through exercise of a parliament’s prerogative to adopt a no-confidence vote in a government; the government, or cabinet, in turn, ordinarily may dissolve the parliament. The British Parliament is supreme, and laws passed by it are not subject to review by the courts for constitutionality. In France, under the Fifth Republic (1958), a Constitutional Council of nine members (appointed for nine years by the president, Senate, and National Assembly) reviews the constitutionality of legislation. The Federal Republic of Germany combines features of parliamentary systems and of federal systems like that of the United States. It vests the right to declare a law unconstitutional in the Federal Constitutional Court (1951).
The framers of the U.S. Constitution, who were influenced by Montesquieu and William Blackstone among others, saw checks and balances as essential for the security of liberty under the Constitution: “It is by balancing each of these powers against the other two, that the efforts in human nature toward tyranny can alone be checked and restrained, and any degree of freedom preserved in the constitution” (John Adams). Though not expressly covered in the text of the Constitution, judicial review—the power of the courts to examine the actions of the legislative and the executive and administrative arms of government to ensure that they are constitutional—became an important part of government in the United States. Other checks and balances include the presidential veto of legislation (which Congress may override by a two-thirds vote) and executive and judicial impeachment by Congress. Only Congress can appropriate funds, and each house serves as a check on possible abuses of power or unwise action by the other. Congress, by initiating constitutional amendments, can in practice reverse decisions of the Supreme Court. The president appoints the members of the Supreme Court but only with the consent of the Senate, which also approves certain other executive appointments. The Senate also must approve treaties.
From 1932 the U.S. Congress exercised a so-called legislative veto. Clauses in certain laws qualified the authority of the executive branch to act by making specified acts subject to disapproval by the majority vote of one or both houses. In 1983, in a case concerning the deportation of an alien, the U.S. Supreme Court held that legislative vetoes were unconstitutional (the House of Representatives had overturned the Justice Department’s suspension of the alien’s deportation). The decision affected clauses in some 200 laws covering a wide range of subjects, including presidential war powers, foreign aid and arms sales, environmental protection, consumer interests, and others. Despite the court’s decision, Congress continued to exercise this power, including the legislative veto in at least 11 of the bills it passed in 1984 alone.
Checks and balances that evolved from custom and Constitutional conventions include the congressional committee system and investigative powers, the role of political parties, and presidential influence in initiating legislation.
Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Subscribe Now
In one-party political systems, informal, and perhaps even illegal, checks and balances may operate when organs of an authoritarian or totalitarian regime compete for power.
What is an example of checks and balances?
Which action is the best example of checks and balances?
What is the purpose of checks and balances?
What are 5 examples of checks and balances?
Bạn đang tìm hiểu bài viết: How does this resolution demonstrate the principle of checks and balances? 2024
HỆ THỐNG CỬA HÀNG TRÙM SỈ QUẢNG CHÂU
Điện thoại: 092.484.9483
Zalo: 092.484.9483
Facebook: https://facebook.com/giatlathuhuongcom/
Website: Trumsiquangchau.com
Địa chỉ: Ngõ 346 Nam Dư, Trần Phú, Hoàng Mai, Hà Nội.
