The United States House of Representatives took a historic and unprecedented step on January 13, 2021, by voting to impeach Donald Trump for a second time. The resolution, known as H. RES. 1155, formally charged the then-president with “incitement of insurrection” following the events of January 6 at the U.S. Capitol.
This action marked the first time in American history that a president was impeached twice, reflecting a period of profound constitutional tension. The resolution served as the legal mechanism to move the proceedings from the House, which holds the sole power of impeachment, to the Senate, which conducts the trial to determine whether the official should be removed from office.
At the core of H. RES. 1155 was the allegation that President Trump had willfully incited a mob to obstruct the certification of the 2020 electoral college votes. The House resolution focused on the president’s rhetoric and actions leading up to and during the breach of the Capitol, framing these as “high crimes and misdemeanors” that threatened the stability of the democratic process.
The Legal Basis of the Incitement Charge
The primary article of impeachment detailed in H. RES. 1155 centered on the charge of incitement of insurrection. House members argued that the president’s efforts to overturn the election results culminated in a call for supporters to “fight like hell,” which they contended led directly to the violence on January 6.
According to the official text available via Congress.gov, the resolution asserted that the president had failed in his constitutional duty to ensure that the laws of the United States were faithfully executed. By allegedly encouraging the disruption of the joint session of Congress, the House argued that Trump had engaged in a breach of public trust.
Legal scholars at the time noted that “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a flexible constitutional term, not limited to indictable crimes. In the context of H. RES. 1155, the House defined the term as a systemic abuse of presidential power intended to undermine the peaceful transfer of power.
Timeline of the Impeachment Process
The movement from the events of January 6 to the formal vote on H. RES. 1155 happened with remarkable speed. Unlike the first impeachment process in 2019, which involved months of committee hearings and testimony, the second impeachment was driven by the immediate visual evidence of the Capitol riot.
The resolution was introduced and passed within days, reflecting the urgency felt by the House majority. This rapid timeline was intended to hold the president accountable before his term officially ended on January 20, 2021.
| Date | Action | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| January 6, 2021 | Capitol Riot | Breach of U.S. Capitol building |
| January 13, 2021 | House Vote | Passed 232-197 (AP) |
| February 13, 2021 | Senate Vote | Acquitted 57-43 (Reuters) |
The Senate Trial and Final Verdict
Following the passage of H. RES. 1155, the proceedings shifted to the U.S. Senate. The trial focused on whether the president’s speech and subsequent inaction constituted a legal incitement of insurrection. Defense attorneys argued that the president’s words were protected under the First Amendment and did not meet the legal threshold for incitement established by the Supreme Court.
The Senate trial was unique because it occurred after Donald Trump had already left office. This raised a significant legal question: whether a former president could be tried by the Senate. A majority of senators ultimately determined that the trial was constitutionally permissible and necessary for the purpose of potential disqualification from future office.
On February 13, 2021, the Senate voted on the article of impeachment. Although a majority of senators—including seven Republicans—voted to convict, the tally of 57-43 fell short of the two-thirds majority (67 votes) required by the Constitution for conviction. Donald Trump was acquitted of the charge.
Stakeholders and Constitutional Impact
The proceedings surrounding H. RES. 1155 affected several key stakeholders within the U.S. Government:
- The House of Representatives: Acted as the grand jury, establishing the charges and the evidence for the “incitement” claim.
- The U.S. Senate: Served as the court and jury, weighing the evidence against the constitutional requirement for a supermajority.
- The Judiciary: While the impeachment is a political process, the definitions of “insurrection” and “incitement” have since informed various civil and criminal court cases related to January 6.
What H. RES. 1155 Means for Presidential Precedent
The legacy of H. RES. 1155 extends beyond the acquittal. It established a precedent for how Congress handles allegations of political violence and the disruption of electoral processes. By formally documenting the charges in a House Resolution, Congress created a permanent historical record of the allegations regarding the president’s role in the Capitol riot.
The process also highlighted the high bar for removing a president or disqualifying them from future office. The gap between a simple majority (which passed the impeachment) and a supermajority (which failed the conviction) underscores the intentional difficulty the Founders built into the impeachment process to prevent it from becoming a purely partisan tool.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice regarding constitutional law or congressional procedure.
The historical record of H. RES. 1155 remains a point of study for legal scholars and historians analyzing the intersection of executive power and legislative oversight. While the Senate trial concluded in February 2021, the legal debates regarding presidential immunity and the definition of insurrection continue to move through the federal court system.
We invite readers to share their thoughts on the constitutional implications of this process in the comments below or share this analysis with others interested in American civic history.
Related reading
