Impeached But Unremoved: The Trial of Andrew Johnson

On March 5, 1868, the U.S. Senate transformed into an unconventional courtroom as it convened to try President Andrew Johnson on charges brought against him by the House of Representatives.

This dramatic moment in American history marked the climax of a bitter political struggle that had been brewing since the end of the Civil War. The impeachment of Johnson was fueled by deep-seated disagreements over how to reconstruct the post-war South, with Radical Republicans vehemently opposing his lenient policies toward the defeated Confederate states.

At the heart of the impeachment proceedings was the allegation that Johnson had violated the Tenure of Office Act. This law, passed by Congress in 1867, was intended to restrict the president’s ability to remove certain officeholders without the Senate's approval. Johnson’s decision to remove Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War and a staunch supporter of the Radical Republicans' policies, and to replace him with Brevet Major General Lorenzo Thomas, was seen as a deliberate breach of this act. To many lawmakers, this removal was not just a bureaucratic maneuver; it was a direct challenge to congressional authority and an affront to the spirit of Reconstruction.

The impeachment vote in the House of Representatives was a powerful manifestation of the deep political divisions of the era. Johnson, who had ascended to the presidency following Abraham Lincoln’s assassination, was a man of strong convictions whose approach to Reconstruction was perceived by many in Congress as too conciliatory towards the former Confederacy.

The Radical Republicans, in particular, viewed his policies as undermining the hard-won gains of the war and as a betrayal of the promise of a transformed South. Their determination to see Johnson held accountable was instrumental in driving the impeachment process forward.

When the Senate trial finally began, the political theater reached its zenith. The senators assumed the role of jurors, and the proceedings were not just a legal inquiry but also a battle for the future direction of the nation. In a narrow vote that would be remembered for its razor-thin margin, the Senate failed to convict Johnson by just one vote. This narrow escape allowed him to remain in office, a decision that reverberated through American political life. Many historians have debated whether this outcome was a reflection of the political maneuvering behind the scenes or a genuine expression of constitutional restraint by the Senate.

Despite surviving the impeachment trial, Andrew Johnson’s presidency remained marred by controversy and conflict. His time in office was characterized by continual clashes with Congress, as his vision for a rapid restoration of the Southern states clashed with the more transformative aims of the Radical Republicans. Johnson's actions during his presidency, particularly in relation to Reconstruction, left a complex legacy that has since been the subject of intense historical scrutiny.

Interestingly, Johnson’s political career did not end with the conclusion of his presidential term. After leaving office on March 4, 1869, he made an unexpected comeback. In 1874, defying expectations, Johnson successfully ran for a seat in the U.S. Senate. His return to Washington, D.C., was laden with symbolism—he was welcomed back into the very chamber where he had once been impeached. This comeback, however, was short-lived. Johnson served in the Senate for just three months before his death on July 31, 1875.

The impeachment of Andrew Johnson remains one of the most significant constitutional crises in American history. It highlighted the intricate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government, and it underscored the intense ideological battles over how best to reunite a fractured nation. Although Johnson survived the impeachment vote by a single senator’s margin, the event left a mark on the nation’s political landscape and continues to be a focal point for discussions about presidential power and accountability.