21 Attorneys General Urge Senate to Reject ‘Flawed’ Impeachment Articles

Republican Attorneys General Sent Legal Brief to U.S. Senate

Washington, D.C.—Attorneys General of 21 states are urging the U.S. Senate to reject the “fundamentally flawed” impeachment articles against President Donald Trump, warning of a “dangerous historical precedent” that will “erode the separation of powers” between the executive and legislative branches.

All 21 Attorneys General are Republican and represent South Carolina, Louisiana, Utah, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.

As Attorneys General of 21 States whose citizens and Electoral College delegates voted in the 2016 presidential election, we have a special duty to defend the integrity of the votes cast by those citizens and electors during that election. However, our interests go well beyond that particular election. This impeachment proceeding threatens all future elections and establishes a dangerous historical precedent. That new precedent will erode the separation of powers shared by the executive and legislative branches by subjugating future Presidents to the whims of the majority opposition party in the House of Representatives.

Attorneys General of: South Carolina, Louisiana, Utah, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia

In the 14-page legal brief (below) sent to the U.S. Senate, the Attorneys General argue both Articles I and II are “legally flawed” and “factually insufficient”. They further argue the partisan impeachment effort is motivated by the desire to undo the results of the 2016 presidential election and influence the 2020 presidential election.

The brief explicitly addresses each of the two articles, noting they fail to outline high crimes and misdemeanors. The Attorneys General also submitted an argument backed by primary sources surrounding the historical meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors.