The trial would be the issue. Does the Senate have the constitutional power to try any private citizen?
Can you impeach a former president ?
- Thread starter Bulletbob
- Start date
The trial would be the issue. Does the Senate have the constitutional power to try any private citizen?
reagansghost
eternal
Seems like a question for the SCOTUS. Since the constitution clearly says that if the power was not listed as belonging to the Federal Government then it belongs elsewhere (to the states or the individual specifically), not mentioning it is exactly the opposite of allowing it. What does it say about an individual's right to a fair trial? It specifically lists impeachment and trial of an elected official, but not somebody who is not serving in that capacity... So, this would likely fall to the individual rights since trials, etc. regarding private citizens is covered....
But what do I know? I'm just listening to constitutional scholars on the subject and they do often have differing opinions.
On one level, I want trump running in 2024. he was not totally repudiated in 2020, just repudiated. I would like to see him totally repudiated. But he has a bad habit of tearing America apart, which I do not like.
So yes, I agree with Uncle, I could go either way. The Senate will work it out.
And in reality, I am saying that I want the Republicans to work it out. With only 50 seats, Democrats would need the Republicans' tacit support to get to two thirds. Maybe Republicans will just not be there to vote against it, thus tacitly supporting it. If Republicans are fine with keeping trump, I figure they get what they deserve.
In the Nixon v. US case, the Supreme Court ruled it had absolutely no jurisdiction to decide anything about impeachment. This is a very strong precedent, because there was no dissenting opinion. Not one Justice voted against that.
For the courts to set any other precedent at this point would require reversing that strong precedent. They looked at the Constitution saying they had absolutely no say in the matter, and found that was true.
reagansghost
eternal
see Walt's post above
Again, according to the constitution they get a say in a trial for a sitting elected official or appointed Judge, they do not get a "say" in a trial of a citizen as that is covered and the power for that does not lie with the Senate.
Just saying things, like Walt does above, doesn't change that this particular scenario has no precedent and that quite a few scholars simply disagree with Walt.
His impeachment started already and he is already in the system being tried. Even if he changed citizenship to another country he is still currently being tried. Just like a police officer can still be tried after being removed as a police officer, Trump is being tried after his presidency is retired because he can still run again. Let's face it that if he were to run again he wouldn't be a private citizen anyway.
Under English Common Law, a trial can only continue if there is a meaningful decision to be made. At first blush, this would seem to support your statement, but it goes a little deeper. The meaningful decision does not have to be the primary decision. So if someone is being tried, could be executed with their property being confiscated, and dies. The primary decision of whether to execute him has been made, but the secondary decision about confiscating property is still open.
In this case, the secondary decision over whether trump should be banned from office still has to be made.
More importantly, the Senate makes the decision of how the trial progresses, and even whether the trial progresses. The Constitution is very particular about "SOLE POWER" being vested with the Senate. This means the Supreme Court cannot review the decision.
It all falls to the Republicans to decide. If the Republicans want him tried and convicted, they can do such. If not, they have enough power to block it.
It doesn't matter if it started already. Much like a person dying tends to end a trial even if the indictment was already handed down, not being an elected official tends to end a Senate Trial even if the impeachment was handed down before they left office. If it didn't we'd be trying Epstein even though he was "suicided" by "somebody"...
Anyway, the requirements listed in the constitution for a trial by the Senate only apply to currently serving elected and appointed politicians and Judges.
The Senate only has the power to try people impeached by the House. The House has the power to impeach anyone they want. In theory, the House can impeach a private citizen. A private citizen would in theory not be able to have committed the crimes that are impeachable, but that is for the House to decide. Impeachment is primarily a remedy for removal, which is meaningless to a private citizen, but again that is for the House to decide.
In this case, the argument is whether an impeachment trial (not the House's impeachment) makes sense when the primary reason has been removed. trump would still be alleged to have committed the impeachable crimes, but the primary remedy no longer makes sense. The secondary remedy is still there, and whether that is enough is up to the Senate.
I am happy for the Senate to decide whatever they want.
This is a POLITICAL process, NOT a cirminal one. The Democratic Party of the Jackass are making a mockery of it much like our election processs.
Son of the Revolution
Banned
But can the Senate put him on trial?
BidenPresident
Verified User
Son of the Revolution
Banned
your opinion... he is out of office now... so why waste tax payer money?
BidenPresident
Verified User
Trump is not out of office now.
The question is about the function of impeachment and that is strictly a Constitutional question. It’s possible the Court could decide the basic function is removal and if that is no longer at issue the secondary function of banning future terms cannot be reached. This would not be a reversal of precedent since it’s a question of first impression.
Son of the Revolution
Banned
keep up asshole, by the time the Senate tries to put him on trial... he will no longer be President