Michael J. Gerhardt
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · Law
Active 1920–2024
About
Michael J. Gerhardt is the Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at UNC School of Law, where he joined the faculty in 2005. His teaching and research focus on constitutional conflicts between presidents and Congress, with particular expertise in impeachment, appointments, presidential power, Supreme Court precedent, and separation of powers. Gerhardt is the author of nine books, including 'Lincoln’s Mentors' (2021) and 'The Forgotten Presidents' (2013), which was named by The Financial Times as one of the best non-fiction books of 2013. He has written over a hundred law review articles and numerous op-eds in prominent publications such as SCOTUSblog, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. His extensive public service includes testifying more than 20 times before Congress, serving as special counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and providing expert commentary during multiple presidential impeachment proceedings. Gerhardt's contributions to legal scholarship and public understanding of constitutional law have been recognized through awards such as the UNC Thomas Jefferson Award in 2023 and his induction into the American Law Institute in 2016.
Research topics
- Political Science
- Art
- Law
Selected publications
The Law of Presidential Impeachment
New York University Press eBooks · 2024 · 2 citations
1st authorCorresponding- Political Science
- Law
- Political Science
A clear and comprehensive overview of presidential impeachment from a leading expert in the field As a result of Donald Trump’s presidency, impeachment was once again thrust into the spotlight of American political discussion. However, its history goes back to the very founding of the nation, when American colonists, remembering their grievances against their former king, entrenched the process in their new Constitution. The Law of Presidential Impeachment breaks down both the law and politics of this process, providing a comprehensive, nonpartisan, and up-to-date explanation of the Constitution’s various mechanisms for holding presidents accountable for their misdeeds. Based on a lifetime of scholarly research, as well as unique experience as a witness and consultant in the impeachment trials of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, Michael J. Gerhardt’s new book takes the reader back to the basics of presidential impeachments. Rather than provide reasons for or against impeaching particular presidents, he explains the law and procedures that govern impeachment, examining a number of significant, yet under-explored, issues and themes. Gerhardt offers new perspectives on the subject, arguing that it cannot be properly understood in a vacuum, but must instead be viewed in the context of its coordination with such other mechanisms as criminal prosecutions, censure, elections, congressional oversight, and the Fourteenth and Twenty-Fifth Amendments. The Law of Presidential Impeachment will be an invaluable, accessible guide for future generations, giving them a succinct yet remarkably nuanced understanding of this core aspect of our executive branch and overarching governmental system.
The Challenges of Constructing the Supreme Court by the Numbers: A Review Article
Political Science Quarterly · 2024-11-29
review1st authorCorrespondingAbstract This review article discusses the strengths and possible limitations of the new book, Making the Supreme Court: The Politics of Appointments, 1930–2020 by Charles M. Cameron and John P. Kastellec. The book, which provides the most extensive empirical analysis of the political construction of the Supreme Court yet written, including conventional and creative analyses of political influences shaping the Supreme Court. The book raises but does not resolve several important questions. While it illuminates some possible answers, a more nuanced analysis is needed in the future to capture the connection between the composition and direction of the Court, particularly in light of unforeseen developments in the law that challenge conventional notions of liberal and conservative jurists.
Supreme Myth Busting: How the Supreme Court Has Busted its Own Myths
Wisconsin law review · 2023-01-01
article1st authorCorrespondingThis Essay challenges various myths of the Supreme Court, including the myth of the Supreme Court as the only branch in the federal government capable of neutral, non-partisan, juridical interpretations of the Constitution. Through various means, I show how the Supreme Court fails to live up to that myth, especially in its failure to abide by the same code of ethics that other judges follow. The Court’s excuse is that it is not like other courts, but, if we take that excuse at face value, then there is more, not less, reason to require the Supreme Court adhere to the same ethical standards every other judge must follow. If the Court is just another court, it should of course be constrained like other courts, including through a code of ethics. But, if it is not like other courts, a code of ethics is even more imperative to ensure the justices from lapsing into just another political venue. In addition to highlighting how the Court’s recent decisions undercut its claims of being a court rather than just another political branch, I use several case studies to show how the Court needs to adhere to a code of ethics to ensure it does not function as presidents and senators would like it to function as an extension of their political powers.
Constitutional commentary · 2022-01-01
articleOpen access1st authorCorrespondingNew York University Press eBooks · 2022-12-21
book-chapter1st authorCorrespondingNew York University Press eBooks · 2020
1st authorCorresponding- Art
The Federal Appointments Process
2020-11-20
book1st authorCorrespondingNew York University Press eBooks · 2020
1st authorCorresponding- Political Science
- Political Science
New York University Press eBooks · 2020-12-31
book-chapter1st authorCorrespondingIntroduction: Legal Ethics in the Age of Trump
eYLS (Yale Law School) · 2020-01-01
articleOpen access1st authorCorrespondingThe North Carolina Law Review has had a long tradition of excellent symposia on significant legal developments, but its timing this year may be the Review's best ever.Just a few weeks before the symposium convened in October, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, authorized the initiation of a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. 1 Over the subsequent nine weeks, the House moved expeditiously, and controversially, to impeach the President for abuse of power for (1) soliciting the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, to open a criminal investigation into one of his political rivals, former Vice President Joseph Biden, and for (2) obstruction of Congress for ordering others in his administration not to comply and refusing to comply himself with lawful congressional subpoenas to elicit information about the Ukraine affair. 2 In the span between January 16, 2020, and February 6, 2020, the Senate acquitted the President after conducting the shortest impeachment trial yet for a President and the only impeachment trial ever conducted in the Senate without witnesses. 3Yet, throughout it all, the President did not act alone: the hearings
Frequent coauthors
- 64 shared
Maria Inman
Faraday Technology (United States)
- 64 shared
Roger Narayan
North Carolina State University
- 64 shared
Jeremy Theil
- 64 shared
Yoshihisa Matsumoto
National Institute of Technology, Oita College
- 64 shared
Tae‐Hoon Lim
- 64 shared
Fikile R. Brushett
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- 64 shared
Liuchuan Tong
- 64 shared
Michael J. Aziz
Harvard University
Education
- 1994
Ph.D., Law
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
- 1989
Other, Law
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
- 1985
B.A., Political Science
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Awards & honors
- Order of the Coif (1982)
- Distinguished Visitor of the Order of the Coif (2020-2021)
- UNC’s Thomas Jefferson Award (2023)
- Resume-aware match score
- Save to shortlist
- AI-drafted outreach
See your match with Michael J. Gerhardt
PhdFit ranks faculty by your research interests, methods, and publications — grounded in their actual work, not templates.
- Free to start
- No credit card
- 30-second signup