Impeachment of Andrew Jackson

999 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Controversies of Andrew Jackson

My fellow congressmen, Representative Nicholas and I are here today to speak to you about the possible impeachment of our President, Andrew Jackson. Many of you allege that President Jackson should be impeached for expanding the powers of presidency and for his actions regarding the national bank, spoils system, the forced removal of Native Americans, and the nullification crisis. The truth, however, is that our president has acted only while keeping the interests of this great nation in mind. He has fought for the common man, and though he has made mistakes and crossed certain boundaries, as almost all presidents do, he has only done so while trying to help our country grow and prosper. There is therefore, no reason for his impeachment.
Jackson believed that the National Bank system was corrupt and unjust, so it was justifiable to withdraw federal funds. The National Bank was only useful for the rich, which were a minority in the United States. As a representer of the entire country, he needed to ensure that all systems were in favor of the general people, not just the elite. He “destroyed” the national bank by vetoing the charter that was approved by the senate. When he vetoed the charter, he lost a few of his wealthy voters, but Jackson gained votes from the common people in the election of 1832 (King Andrew and the Bank). Then, Jackson withdrew federal funds and created pet banks. This was an attempt to help the common man become equal individual of the US. Jackson’s efforts failed because these banks raised the demand of paper money, leading to inflation and an unstable economy. Even though this idea resulted in an economic downfall, it was a neither a crime nor treasonous; it was merely a poor decision. Jackso...

... middle of paper ...

...olina and brought back order to the nation, a result which is far from worthy of impeachment. Whatever legal or ethical qualms one may have about Jackson’s reaction to this crisis, he acted only in order to maintain order and keep this great nation unified.
President Andrew Jackson should not be impeached because his actions were legal and were in the best interest of the future of the United States. No legal action can be taken against the president, as everything that was done was in accordance to his job. He aided the common people and helped the country grow. Whether you think that Andrew Jackson has been a good or bad president, he has only acted in the interests of our nation and has not violated any laws. His presidency wasn't the most successful, but regardless, he did nothing worthy of impeachment and on no grounds should impeachment even be considered.

Show More
Related

  • Andrew Jackson And The Search For Vindication Summary

    420 Words  | 1 Pages

    As the author of Andrew Jackson and the Search for Vindication, James C. Curtis seems to greatly admire Andrew Jackson. Curtis pointed out that Jackson was a great American general who was well liked by the people. As history shows, Andrew Jackson had his flaws; for example, he thought the National Bank of the United States was going to kill him but he was determined to kill it first. He resented the Bank because he thought it was the reason for the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson was elected to the presidency in 1824 after first being nominated in 1822. He was sixty-one when he was elected the seventh president of the United States.

    Read More

  • DBQ On Jacksonian Democrats

    487 Words  | 1 Pages

    One of the Jacksonian Democrats’ attempts to reduce the influence of the rich was by vetoing the charter to the Bank of the United States. Jackson stated his reasons in Document B mainly as a precaution of...

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Andrew Jackson

    820 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the summer of 1832 and Congress renewed the Bank’s charter even though it wasn’t due until 1836. Jackson hesitated to approve of the charter, so Henry Clay and Nicholas Biddle went on the offensive to attempt to persuade Jackson to pass the bill. Jackson, having had his opinion on the banks cemented by Clay’s presence in the organization, then committed to de-establishing the Second National Bank. He waged war against Biddle in particular to make sure Biddle lost power. He vetoed the bank bill, and after winning the race to be reelected, he closed Biddle’s bank. He ordered his Secretary of the Treasury to move money from the Second National Bank to smaller, state banks. When Congress returned from its summer recess, it censured him for his actions. In 1836, Bank of US was dead, and the new democratic-congressmen expunged Jackson’s censure. Because Jackson had no formal plan for managing the nation’s funds after the Second National Bank closed, it caused problems in Van Buren’s administration. He destroyed the Bank of the United States, in the main, for personal reasons. Jackson hated the bank before his presidency because as a wealthy land and slave owner he had lost money due to its fiscal policies. He believed that Congress had no right under the constitution to charter a

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson and the Bank War

    2332 Words  | 5 Pages

    The validity of President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Bank War issue has been contradicted by many, but his reasoning was supported by fact and inevitably beneficial to the country. Jackson’s primary involvement with the Second Bank of the United States arose during the suggested governmental re-chartering of the institution. It was during this period that the necessity and value of the Bank’s services were questioned.

    Read More

  • Jackson Should Be Removed From the Twenty Dollar Bill

    953 Words  | 2 Pages

    Recognizing the injustices president Andrew Jackson performed, Americans have considered the dispute over the removal of Jackson 's face from the twenty dollar bill. The real question remains why place America 's figures in iconic positions based on fame? Benedict Arnold is famous, yet he was a traitor to America . Why not place figures that contributed to the well-being of the country and upheld humane morals? Jackson 's administration only improved the system, initiating the progress toward a modern democratic government. Under President Jackson, the elimination of voter property qualifications allowed a variety of citizens from different social classes to elect government officials 1. Jackson also ended the national banks that resembled the greedy monopolies of the late 1800's 1.

    Read More

  • Jacksonian Democracy Dbq

    1046 Words  | 3 Pages

    Jackson was a strong opponent of the unequal and aristocrat dominated economic structure of most of America. He was very against the Bank of America because he believed it to have a monopoly on banking and felt that it was owned and run unjustly by wealthy aristocrats who were not always Americans (B). It must also be noted however, that while the Bank of America was undoubtedly corrupt (Nicholas Biddle is known to have given sums of money to close friends, and was also known to regularly bribe newspapers and similar media.) it also did what it was supposed to do very well. It provided money and credit to many of the lower classes that Jackson defended, and also was the source of much economic growth. As a result of this veto Jackson established pet banks in many Western areas to try to appease his main group of supporters and build up the rivalry between the agrarian South and West and the industrial North (C). Many immigrants found that one of the first things they discovered upon entering America was a sense of economic equality and lack of poverty, which are exactly the things Jackson was working towards (D). The case Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge decided that a charter given a person or group to do a service does not allow that group to have complete rights over this service. This decision supports the Jacksonian Democracy ideas that the rights of the community are more important than the rights of business (H).

    Read More

  • How Democratic Was Andrew Jackson Dbq

    589 Words  | 2 Pages

    The bank would be more for the rich and the foreign, but have no benefits for the poor. Jackson’s political rival, Daniel Webster, believes that this letter from Jackson showed just how evil Jackson was. Webster does not think Jackson was vetoing for the good of the people, but to ‘stir the pot’. By Jackson sending this letter, it causes a stir between the rich and the poor. The poor would feel imbalanced against the poor, and arguments would rush out.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson Document Based Question

    1140 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout the Jacksonian era the Jacksonians proved to be violators of the United States Constitution and not the guardians they believed themselves to be. Both the Jacksonians and President Jackson went against the Supreme Courts regarding cases that were said to be constitutional. In the Supreme Court case of Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee Nation. This ruling of the Supreme Court did not stop Jackson and the Jacksonians from driving the Cherokees off of their land, and by doing this the Constitution was violated. Also, when dealing with the south, Jackson and the Jacksonians were not guardians of the US Constitution. In vetoing the national bank, Jackson did so because he thought that the act that created it was not compatible with the constitution. However, the Supreme Court had already ruled that the bank was constitutional. In this act Jackson and the Jacksonians were not guarding the constitution, but they were utilizing it to suit their own needs. However sometimes the Judiciary and Executive branches agree such as the incident when South Carolina declared a reduced tariff void and threatened to secede, President Jackson responded in an unconstitutional manner. Jackson threatened to send militia to enforce the tariff implementation and the Jacksonian Congress passed a bill approving this military force, if necessary.

    Read More

  • The Reasons Why Andrew Jackson Was Democratic?

    1497 Words  | 3 Pages

    One reason why Andrew Jackson was not democratic was because of his mistreatment of the Native American. Today, the population of Native Americans are significantly less than when Jackson served as the leader of the free world. From the early 1830’s until 1840, Jackson forced 5 separate Indian tribes onto a small piece of land (Doc L). A likely reason for this sudden move

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson: The People's King

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... one of the stipulations and had to be settled. The removal of the Natives in an effort to protect the American people on the frontier proceeded, and was all the region of present-day Oklahoma, as shown in document L. These actions are viewed as cruel and unjust, but it was the way that would’ve dealt the least damage. Further delaying the issue would’ve soon set into altercations between the various Native tribes and the United States of America. In retrospect, Jackson served to protect the people.

    Read More

  • Jacksonian Democracy

    779 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout the Jacksonian era the Jacksonians proved to be violators of the United States Constitution and not the guardians they believed themselves to be. Both the Jacksonians and President Jackson went against the Supreme Courts regarding cases that were said to be constitutional. An instance in which the Jacksonian Democrats violated the Constitution was in the "Trail of Tears". The Supreme Court stated that the Jacksonian Democrats' actions were unconstitutional because they had issued the "Indian Removal Act". By doing this, they were in violation of the treaty of New Echota. In the 1832 decision Worcester v. Georgia, Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the Cherokees had their own land and that they did not need to follow Georgia law in their own territory. This ruling of the Supreme Court did not stop Jacksonians from driving the Cherokees off of their land. Jackson used the Constitution to benefit himself when he vetoed the national bank, even after the Supreme Court had already ruled that the bank was constitutional. When South Carolina declared a reduced tariff void and threatened to secede, President Jackson responded in an unconstitutionally. He threatened to send militia to enforce the tariff and the Jacksonian Congress passed a bill approving this military force, if necessary. This was in direct violation of the Constitution. They continued to violate the Constitution by placing censors on the mail and intercepting abolitionist literature or mail into or from the south. This was an infringement on the Constitution because it violated the first amendment.

    Read More

  • Impeachment Of Andrew

    689 Words  | 2 Pages

    But others today see that impeachment as political opportunism. “Namely, Johnson was opposed to congressional Reconstruction,” says Hans Louis Trefousse, author of Andrew Johnson: A Biography. “So Johnson blocked that and, because he did, they [Republicans] eventually decided they should throw him out.” “A more technical inquiry can hardly be imagined, and as a separate basis for removing a president from office it bordered on the absurd,” wrote U.S.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson Pros And Cons

    1248 Words  | 3 Pages

    America has many presidents who are still remembered with their legacies, but President Andrew Jackson’s presidency is a history of which the Native American will never forget. Jackson’s democracy was not in support for women to vote, and black men to join in armies. The people who paid the greatest price through his presidency were the Indian tribes, whom he forced to move from their land which belonged to their ancestors.

    Read More

  • Democracy In The 19th Century

    1358 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, critics of Jackson and democracy called him “King Andrew I” because of his apparent abuse of presidential power [vetoing]. These critics believed he favored the majority so much that it violated the U.S. constitution, and they stated he was straying too far away from the plan originally set for the United States. Because of the extreme shift of power to the majority, the limiting of rights of the few [merchants, industrialists] and the abuse of power under Jackson’s democracy, the foundational documents set in the constitution was violated, and the work of the preceding presidents were all but lost. During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson: America's Most Popular President

    705 Words  | 2 Pages

    Andrew Jackson was an autocratic president who exerted his authority like the “first king” of the United States. Jackson’s power went from single handedly vetoing the National Bank charter, to ignoring the separation of the branches of government, placing unfit men into important official job holdings and forcing Native Americans off their homeland.

    Read More

More about Impeachment of Andrew Jackson

Open Document