15, two days after Trump's impeachment and in anticipation of the likelihood that the Senate would take up an impeachment trial after Trump's term was up: This is from a Congressional Research Service legal briefing on Jan. Some conservatives point to that language and say it means impeachment applies to only current officeholders - and that the principal goal of impeachment and conviction is to remove someone from office.īut that's not the view of the preponderance of scholars. "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment. Let's start with what the Constitution says: That vote wasn't without controversy, though. But the prevailing consensus is that it is within the scope of the Senate, especially considering it voted on the very subject in 1876 and said, yes, it did have jurisdiction. There is certainly some debate about it, as NPR's Nina Totenberg explored this month. The House then dropped the case.īut is the Senate allowed to take up an impeachment trial after someone leaves office? What does the Constitution say about it, and what did the Framers think? President Richard Nixon resigned before the House voted on articles of impeachment filed against him. Only two presidents had ever been impeached before Trump a president had never been impeached twice before Trump and no president has ever been tried by the Senate after leaving office. The Senate has convicted only eight, all federal judges. senator, a Cabinet member and three presidents. history have ever been impeached - 15 judges, a U.S. Trump's presidency made practical what were previously esoteric constitutional questions, the stuff of hypothetical "what if" scholarly journal articles. So let's dive into the constitutionality question, as well as that 1876 case that Democrats have begun citing as evidence that trying a president after he leaves office is well within the bounds of what the Senate can do. Republicans are relying, at least in part, on a professor who appears to be at odds with himself - arguing now that it's unconstitutional, but writing the opposite 22 years ago, after a Democrat had been impeached. "I will listen as a juror, but as I have said, I do have questions about the constitutionality of holding a Senate trial and removing from office someone who is now a private citizen." 6 through his words and actions," Portman said in a statement after the vote. "I've been very clear that former President Trump bears some responsibility for what happened on Jan. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, sided with 44 other Republicans on Tuesday in a failed attempt to dismiss the trial based on Trump being a private citizen. Still, even a more moderate senator, like retiring Sen. It happened 145 years ago, and the impeachment managers in that 19th-century case believed that by holding that trial no one would again question whether it was allowed. And there is already precedent for the Senate trying an official after he has left office.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |