Timeline for Why isn't the constitutionality of Trump's 2nd impeachment decided by the supreme court?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 2021 at 8:48 | comment | added | JBentley | @KevinWells We're not debating whether or not the Senate can impeach or try an ex-president, or whether there is a valid purpose to continuing a trial. We're debating whether or not that these are matters for the Supreme Court to determine. | |
| Jan 29, 2021 at 7:50 | comment | added | user64742 | @KevinWells yes, but we’re not talking about impeaching an ex-president. We are talking about sentencing an ex-president. That is to say, can any action be taken against him now that he is not the sitting president. Do they have the legal right to even vote to sentence him? It is a reasonable question to ask and address, though most likely the answer is “yes it is legal”. | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 22:12 | comment | added | Kevin | @JBentley If the question is whether or not you can impeach an ex-president then that doesn't apply here. He was impeached while he was still president, and now the trial is being held after he left office. If the question is whether or not the issue is now moot since he has already left office then perhaps there is a reasonable question to be answered there, but conviction on impeachment charges can not just remove an officer, but can prevent them from ever holding office again, so there is a valid purpose to continuing a trial | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 20:41 | comment | added | JBentley | @KevinWells Or to make the point more generally, it should be clear that the Senate doesn't have the power of impeachment over every citizen on earth. There are limits, notwithstanding the phrase "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments". The simple way of looking at it is to realise that the word "Impeachment" in that sentence has a specific meaning and it has to actually be a [valid] impeachment for the Senate's power to be effective. Whether something is an impeachment can be disputed. | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 20:25 | comment | added | JBentley | @KevinWells Yes, but let's be realistic here. Nobody is disputing the lines you have quoted. The part which is up for dispute is in Article II, Section 4: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.". There very much is a non-trivial question as to whether the Senate has the power to try an ex-President, and it is something the Supreme Court can rule on. | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 19:39 | comment | added | Kevin | @JBentley Technically yes they could rule on whether or not the Senate has this power, but it would be perhaps the most trivial ruling in history since the Constitution literally says "The House of Representatives shall chuse[sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and later says of the Senate "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments." That is about as clear as it could possibly be, and any interpretation that denied them that power would be insane | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 16:43 | comment | added | JBentley | @KevinWells Yes, but the question about whether or not they have that power is the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. There is no exception for impeachment. There seems to be a huge misunderstanding on this point in the highest voted answer. | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 22:03 | comment | added | reirab | It's true that the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority on constitutional questions, but that does not mean that the Senate doesn't have authority to decide constitutional questions regarding its work that courts have not yet ruled on. Raising a point of order (as Senator Paul did) is exactly what members of Congress are supposed to do when they believe a matter before their house of Congress violates the Constitution, U.S. law, or congressional rules. | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 16:24 | comment | added | Kevin | While this is true as a general principle, in this particular case a vote on impeachment is constitutional by definition because the constitution states that they have sole power over impeachment | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 16:09 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 27, 2021 at 16:18 | |||||
| Jan 27, 2021 at 16:07 | history | answered | Susan Bell | CC BY-SA 4.0 |