Can a state impeach W? Can Fitz? (UPDATED)

Can a state legislature initiate impeachment proceedings against the president? The Illinois legislature thinks so:

2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and

6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and

11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and

15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and

18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and...

And so on. You get the idea. This all sounds good. But is it real?

First: The impeachment resolution really does show up on the Illinois Legislature web site. (Scroll down to the bottom -- HJR0125). But that doesn't mean that Illinois will be able to cajole a republican Congress into acknowledging its interpretation of Jefferson's Manual. The Senate follows the Standing Rules of the Senate, and there can be no impeachment and conviction without the Senate.

Even so, getting these impeachment proceedings on record is a delicious idea. And to make the cake even tastier, Jefferson's Manual offers still another way to bring about an impeachment. Here is the relevant section:

Sec. 603. Inception of impeachment proceedings in the House.

In the House of Representatives there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: by charges made on the floor on the responsibility of a Member or Delegate (II, 1303; III, 2342, 2400, 2469; VI, 525, 526, 528, 535, 536); by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually referred to a committee for examination (III, 2364, 2491, 2494, 2496, 2499, 2515; VI, 543); or by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to a committee (Apr. 15, 1970, p. 11941-42; Oct. 23, 1973, p. 34873); by a message from the President (III, 2294, 2319; VI, 498); by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469) or Territory (III, 2487) or from a grand jury (III, 2488); or from facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House (III, 2399, 2444).

Didja see it? "by charges transmitted from...a grand jury."

Has someone instructed Patrick Fitzgerald as to just how much power that grand jury actually holds? Perhaps the good ladies of POLL (Patrick's Official Lusting League) might care to contact his office... (Many thanks to reader "sunny"...)

UPDATE: Actually, this is more of a "backdate." Bob Fertik posted the full rules back in January. One of his readers offered the following points of interest:

A direct proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business (III, 2045-2048; VI, 468, 469; July 22, 1986, p. 17294; Aug. 3, 1988, p. 20206; May 10, 1989, p. 8814; see Procedure, ch. 14, sec. 1-5)... but a resolution simply proposing an investigation, even though impeachment may be a possible consequence, is not privileged (III, 2050, 2546; VI, 463). But where a resolution of investigation positively proposes impeachment or suggests that end, it has been admitted as of privilege (III, 2051, 2052, 2401, 2402).

Will the gambit succeed, sans a Democratic majority? No. Is it worth doing? Yep!