Abstract

At a time of genuine outrage over executive abuse of office, this article (to employ the 'ethics with teeth' metaphor) proposes refashioning the current deciduous dentition of the office and its not quite mature ethics. A long legal tradition is cited as justifying jural standing for stewardship. Juridical standing, on the other hand, is given a protective crown, developed and fitted with a view toward prudently but assuredly bringing abusers to heel. Dealt with in succession are, 1) reprise of Roman public law stressing its similarities with common law impeachment; 2) some case law on standing, with arguments explaining why "things" (but rarely people) can take on jural standing, and why people (but not things) qualify for juridical standing; 3) special topics of substance and procedure implied in a new class of offense, and 4) a summary overview, with remarks on Lebed, Madoff and Blagojevich, and the abuse of office suits that might have brought them down much sooner.