How does the U.S. Constitution provide for the removal or restraint of a president, and how have those mechanisms been used in actual historical cases?
Ex-CIA director calls for ousting Trump: ‘25th amendment was written with him in mind’
John Brennan says president who made volatile remarks about destroying Iranian civilization ‘is clearly unhinged’.The former Central Intelligence Agency director John Brennan has added his name to growing calls for the president to be ousted on grounds that he is unfit for the job, arguing that the US constitution’s 25th amendment addressing involuntary removal from office was “written with Donald Trump in mind”. The Guardian
This lesson uses a current news article to investigate a larger constitutional issue: what happens when Americans believe a president should no longer exercise presidential power? Students often treat impeachment, resignation, and the 25th Amendment as if they are interchangeable. They are not. The Constitution gives the House the sole power to impeach and the Senate the sole power to try impeachments, while the 25th Amendment establishes a different process focused on presidential inability rather than “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Learning Objectives
By the end of the lesson, students will be able to:
- explain the constitutional difference between impeachment and the 25th Amendment
- summarize the argument made in the April 2026 article
- compare the cases of Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump
- evaluate whether a controversy is better understood as a question of misconduct, incapacity, political conflict, or public opinion
- support claims with evidence from both current journalism and historical examples
Opening Prompt
Write these three headlines or statements on the board:
- “A president should be impeached.”
- “A president should resign.”
- “A president should be removed under the 25th Amendment.”
Ask students to respond in writing:
What is the difference among these three outcomes? Who has the power in each case?
Then invite brief responses. Do not correct everything immediately. Let confusion surface. In my view, that confusion is pedagogically productive here because it gives the lesson a genuine purpose.
Vocabulary and Key Terms
Students define and discuss:
- impeachment
- conviction
- acquittal
- resignation
- incapacity
- 25th Amendment
- high crimes and misdemeanors
- cabinet
- House of Representatives
- Senate trial
The Constitutional Framework
Impeachment
- The House has the sole power to impeach.
- The Senate conducts the trial.
- Removal requires conviction.
- The constitutional standard is “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
25th Amendment
- Concerned with inability to perform the office, not criminality in the usual sense.
- Section 3 allows a president to declare their own temporary inability.
- Section 4 allows the vice president and a majority of the cabinet, or another body created by Congress, to declare the president unable.
- If contested, Congress decides, requiring two-thirds of both houses to keep the vice president acting as president.
Article Study
Students read the article and annotate for:
- Who is making the argument?
- What specific behavior is being cited?
- What constitutional mechanism is being proposed?
- What objections or practical barriers are mentioned?
- Does the article seem more legal, political, or moral in tone?
Questions
- What is Brennan arguing, and what evidence does he use to support his position?
- Why is the 25th Amendment, rather than impeachment, the centerpiece of the article?
- According to the reporting, why is removal under the 25th Amendment politically unlikely in this case?
- Does the article present a constitutional argument, a political argument, or both? Explain.
- What additional information would you want before deciding whether the 25th Amendment is an appropriate mechanism?
- Is the Brennan article really about law, or is it mostly about political signaling?
- When should a democracy use impeachment rather than elections to resolve disputes?
- Is the 25th Amendment best understood as a medical safeguard, a constitutional emergency tool, or a political instrument that is hard to use in practice?
- Looking across Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, and Trump, does impeachment function more as a removal device or as a public constitutional judgment?
- Which case do you think set the most important precedent, and why?
Historical Comparison Activity
Divide students into four groups. Each group studies one presidential case and then teaches the class.
Group 1: Andrew Johnson
Johnson became the first president impeached by the House. The House’s own historical summary notes that he was later acquitted by the Senate by one vote.
Questions:
- What conflict drove Johnson’s impeachment?
- Why is this case often seen as deeply tied to Reconstruction politics?
- What does “acquitted by one vote” suggest about the difficulty of removal?
Group 2: Richard Nixon
Nixon is the most important “almost impeached” case. The House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment, but Nixon resigned before the full House voted. National Archives material notes that the committee approved three articles and that Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974.
Questions:
- Why is Nixon remembered as an impeachment case even though the full House never impeached him?
- How did evidence change congressional support?
- Why might resignation be preferable to impeachment and trial?
Group 3: Bill Clinton
Library of Congress material notes that the House adopted two articles of impeachment against Clinton and that the Senate later acquitted him. The case centered on perjury and obstruction of justice connected to a civil lawsuit and grand jury investigation.
Questions:
- What was Clinton accused of?
- Why did some senators and citizens view the conduct as serious but not removable?
- What does this case reveal about the gap between legal wrongdoing and political consensus for removal?
Group 4: Donald Trump
Donald Trump is the only U.S. president to have been impeached twice. Library of Congress materials summarize that he was impeached twice and acquitted in both Senate trials. The Constitution Annotated notes that the first impeachment grew from the Ukraine call and the second from the January 6 attack; the Senate vote in the second trial was 57 guilty to 43 not guilty, still short of the two-thirds threshold.
Questions:
- Why were the two Trump impeachments different from each other?
- What does it mean that a president can be impeached twice and still remain or avoid removal?
- How does Trump’s historical position complicate public understanding of impeachment?
Comparison Chart
Have students fill out a chart with these headings:
- President
- Year
- Main accusation or controversy
- Was the president impeached by the House?
- Was the president convicted by the Senate?
- Was the president removed?
- What larger constitutional issue does the case raise?
Writing Task
Essay Question:
Should the conduct described in the April 2026 article be treated primarily as a matter for impeachment, the 25th Amendment, elections, or public debate? Use the article and at least two historical presidential cases to defend your answer.
