Have we ever had a sitting President get arrested?

[Nimrod2005]

What would it take to arrest him?

Who will carry out such task? Local D.C. police? the military? the FBI? Secret Service? CIA?

How would something like that work? Can Congress order his arrest?

[MrCoffee]

1. i have no idea if you're serious or not

but the very thought made me drool a little.

[Nimrod2005]

8. I am very serious...

If he doesn't listen to Congress, the military, or the voters...If he insists on sticking to his bad policies which basically get more of our kids killed and injured, AND cost the country overwhelming amounts of money, then we are left with no choice.

If I am in Congress, I would look into this ---- Living under the rule of a MAD MAN is un-American!!!

[Warpy]

15. I don't think so

until after he's impeached and removed from office.

[MrCoffee]

18. Congress can't arrest anyone

Arrest is an Executive function.

[AndyA]

2. I think U.S. Marshalls have the authority to arrest a President.

It sure seems Congress should have authority to make it happen as well. That's a good question. I know some smart DUer will have the answer for certain.

[MrCoffee]

7. It would depend entirely on what he's being arrested for

if it was shoplifting, DC police

if it's for a federal crime, FBI (maybe local police)

Congress can't order the arrest of the President. The legislative branch writes the laws, the executive branch enforces them. The warrant would have to come from some police authority (FBI, Treasury can do it, DC police).

[feduppuke]

17. Nope

Congress can not arrest the Pres (Equal Branches. He would have to be removed from office. Afterward, he is subject to arrest, etc.

[treestar]

3. I don't see why he couldn't be arrested by the jurisdiction who would

arrest anyone for a given crime.

If he committed even just a misdemeanor, say in the city of D.C., couldn't the DC cops arrest him under the same conditions as they would anyone else?

There'd have to be a warrant or probable cause for a violation of the city's laws (or any state he happened to be in).

IOW, why couldn't he be arrested under the same terms as any citizen? He's not immune for any of his criminal acts, is he?

[Nimrod2005]

10. No idea, I want to know how it works......nt

[Kelly Rupert]

4. I'm fairly certain he'd just pardon himself,

or, barring that, have Cheney pardon him. We'd have to impeach and remove before we'd arrest.

[Turbineguy]

5. As Police Inspector Hans Wilhelm Friederich Kemp

in Young Frankenstein would say: "UNDTTT... I think it's about time we had one!"

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. did they arrest Aaron Burr?

After all, he killed a man - and I think the duel happened when he was Vice President.

[Kelly Rupert]

9. He was charged with murder in New York, but never arrested n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

11. I'm thinking COMMITTMENT....

I think we can make a case based upon the following criteria:

Danger to self
Danger to others
Gravely disabled; to the extent he cannot function outside a structured environment.

Get a doc and a judge quick! :scared: The man is psychotic...

[DisgruntledVet]

12. A President

has absolute immunity.

[MrCoffee]

14. that's just not true

if the President just picks up a gun and blows someone away, there's no immunity.

Immunity for official acts, yes.

[feduppuke]

16. Unfortunately

That requires a majority of the cabinet and the VP to sign off (Amendment 25)

[feduppuke]

13. I think this was

One of the questions the House Judiciary Committee wrestled with when looking at Nixon. As I recall, they concluded that he could not be arrested while sitting as Pres (he is, after all, the titular head of all federal law enforcement). Also, as someone noted above, he could just pardon himself for anything/everything. I think the conventional wisdom is that a Pres must be impeached and removed from office. Once he is a private citizen, he can be indicted, arrested, etc.

[Xithras]

19. You cannot arrest a president without first stripping his authority.

Officer: Mr. President, You're under arrest.
Bush: Under the authority of the President of the United States, I hereby authorize Presidential Order number 1234567, pardoning myself of all crimes committed in my lifetime.
Officer: Sorry to bother you Mr. President, have a nice day.

This is why you can't just arrest a president. If you tried, he could pardon himself with a verbal command. Congress would have to meet and draft a resolution overturning the order, both houses would need to authorize it, the president would have to veto it (or stall for months until a de-facto veto was registered), and the veto would have to be overridden. It would be a monstrously time consuming pain in the a$$.

You have to strip the president of power through an impeachment before he can be arrested. If he tries to pardon himself during the impeachment process, articles to overturn his pardons can be added to the impeachment resolutions.

This is why we shouldn't be allowing idiots to become president. It's an incredibly powerful position, and it's very hard to get the bad ones back out.

[feduppuke]

20. Actually

It's worse than what you describe above. There is *no* check on pardon powers. They are not executive orders, but writs unto themselves over which Congress has no power.

However, pardons only apply to *criminal* prosecutions. They would have no application to impeachment procedings (which is why impeachment is a legislative power and an absolute check on the executive).

[Xithras]

23. I wasn't referring to pardons for a reason.

A pardon can only be issued for a specific crime, which generally means that charges have to be filed. An executive order could theoretically issue a blanket pardon to a person for ALL CRIMES. It's never been tried, but there is no legal reason why it wouldn't be valid.

Hypothetically, if an officer were to try to arrest Bush, he wouldn't know exactly what charges he was facing and wouldn't be able to pardon himself. A blanket pardon via executive order solves that problem.

[Retrograde]

21. I think Grant got a ticket

or whatever the 19th century equivalent was, for reckless carriage driving in Washington. At least that's what I remember from my Big Book of Presidents way back in 3rd grade or thereabouts...

This whole executive immunity nonsense was something Nixon came up with to keep from being investigated. And as Congress showed under Clinton, a sitting president can be called in to testify.

[feduppuke]

22. It's hard not to mix the two...

But they are actually quite different. Pres. Clinton was forced to testify in a civil matter. No sitting president has ever been charged in a criminal matter because they can'y be. See above for the reasons why.

[MrCoffee]

24. Grant was a menace behind the reins

:rofl: