« Fully deserved, censorship and condemnation of the American people and Congress. » Beginning in 1972, the most clear resolutions to censor a president used the word censorship in the resolution. H.Res. 652 does not use the word censorship, but it is probably a resolution of defiance because it « condemns » the president as an individual, instead of simply condemning the president`s actions. Simple resolutions that censure a member of Congress for « disorderly behavior » – that is, resolutions that fulfill a member`s disciplinary function in accordance with the Constitution – are preferred in the House of Representatives and the Senate for consideration. In Parliament, the privileged resolutions take precedence over the ordinary Rules of Procedure; They may be called to the scene if the House is not considering any other matter.8 In the Senate, motions to move to privileged resolutions are not debatable. 9 In two identified cases (Presidents Lincoln and Taft), the Resolutions of the Chamber were amended so as to no longer clearly censure the President. In another case (President Buchanan), the language of the resolution might intend to have a less reprimand than a letter of defiance. The fourth case, President Andrew Jackson, remains the most obvious case of motions of censure of the president by resolution, although his distrust was later removed. Since distrust is not explicitly mentioned as an accepted form of reprimand, many complaints of distrust against members of Congress can be officially cited as reprimands, convictions, or denunciations. However, the end result is the same and, in all respects, these are censorship measures. At the same time, each case of mistrust is different and those who provide censorship want to have sufficient leeway to adapt the gravity. Nevertheless, even for the biggest politician, the prospect of an open and public rebuke from his peers is painful. The Jackson case was the subject of a dispute over the Second Bank of the United States. In 1832, Jackson vetoed a law to renew the bank`s statutes.
The following year, he instructed his minister of finance, William J. Duane, to begin withdrawing government deposits from the bank. . . .