1/ A thread. In anticipation of the #Dershowitz argument tomorrow, I'd like to point out that SCOTUS has already decided a case based, in part, on the idea that impeachable offenses can include official acts that are not crimes. Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982) was . . .
2/ was a civil damages lawsuit brought by a DOD Management Analyst against President Nixon on the alleged ground that he was unconstitutionally fired in retaliation for his congressional testimony on cost overruns. . . .
3/ The Court held that Nixon, "as a former President of the United States, [was] entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts."457 U.S. at 749. Part of the Court's analysis was that there already existed meaningful constraints . . .
4/ on improper action by the President without vulnerability to civil damages. The Court said, at 757: "A rule of absolute immunity for the President will not leave the Nation without sufficient protection against misconduct on the part of the Chief Executive. There remains . . .
5/ the constitutional remedy of impeachment." This statement would have been meaningless unless the Court assumed that impeachment was available for wrongful acts that were not crimes -- no crime was at issue in Fitzgerald. #HighCrimesAndMisdemeanors #ImpeachmentGrounds
