How is this constitutional?

[George K]

Sen. Patrick Leahy To Preside Over Trump's Senate Impeachment Trial

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., will preside over former President Donald Trump's trial in the Senate, a Senate source tells NPR. Leahy, 80, is the president pro tempore of the Senate, a constitutional role given to the longest-serving lawmaker in the majority party. The president pro tempore is third in the line of presidential succession, after the vice president and House speaker.

"I have presided over hundreds of hours in my time in the Senate," Leahy told reporters. "I don't think anybody has ever suggested I was anything but impartial in those hundreds of hours."

Leahy added: "I'm not presenting the evidence. I am making sure that procedures are followed. I don't think there's any senator who over the 40-plus years I've been here that would say that I am anything but impartial in voting on procedure."

Chief Justice John Roberts presided over President Trump's first impeachment trial, but now that Trump is a former president, Roberts is not constitutionally obligated to preside.

Okay, the article states that the Chief Justice is not constitutionally obligated to preside. However, the constitution also states that the Chief Justice shall preside over the impeachment of The President.

So Roberts isn't obligated to preside because...Trump isn't the President. But the Senate can hold a trial even though...Trump is not the President.

If I were Rudy Sidney a competent lawyer, I'd question the standing of the Senate to hold such a trial because, it's all about standing, amirite?

[George K]

McCarthy:

Whether an impeachment trial for a non-incumbent is constitutional is a separate question from whether conducting one is a good idea. The two are melded, though, by what appears to be the majority GOP position in opposition to an impeachment trial for former president Trump. Some Republicans will try to dismiss the case on constitutional grounds after House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) sends the “incitement to insurrection” article of impeachment to the Senate on Monday. Other Republicans, such as Senator Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), argue that an impeachment trial will further divide the country, and are poised to avert it, or shut it down as early as possible, on whatever grounds are available. The constitutional niceties seem beside the point.

I say this core constitutional question is less practically significant than it should, perhaps, be because it is a foregone conclusion. The Democrats are in the (narrow) majority, they will unify in favor of conducting the trial, and there will be enough Republicans who conclude that such a trial is constitutional that the full Senate will approve it.

Those who think the Supreme Court will ultimately have to resolve the constitutional question are, I believe, mistaken. The Constitution gives the Senate plenary authority over the trial of impeachments. History and precedent are on the side of those who argue that impeachment trials of non-incumbents are constitutional, but that is beside the point. The Supreme Court surely wants no part of this hot political dispute, and the Constitution’s commitment of impeachment trials to Senate control gives the justices a good reason to stay out of it.

[jon-nyc]

It does seem a little too convenient, threading that needle that way.

But if anything that will give Trump ammo to fight it with the Supremes, I would think.

[Loki]

Trump will not get convicted anyway.

[Copper]

Let's have unity.

[taiwan_girl]

@loki said in How is this constitutional?:

Trump will not get convicted anyway.

I agree. And if he did, and appeal it, I believe that there would be convenient delays such that it would not reach the US Supreme Court before President Trump passed or some other reason that they could dismiss without an actual ruling on it.

[George K]

@taiwan_girl that will never happen. A conviction is final and SCOTUS has no constitutional basis for hearing an appeal. This is not a criminal trial. It is a political act.

Ann Althouse has an interesting analysis. Bottom line is this is an abuse of power by the Senate.

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/01/did-chief-justice-john-roberts-decline.html

[Jolly]

@copper said in How is this constitutional?:

Let's have unity.

C'mon man!

[Jolly]

Partisan impeachment drives are doomed to fail. The Senate must restore sanity to this impeachment process. We must exercise judgment and do justice. We have to act in the interest of the Nation. History will judge us based on whether this case was resolved in a way that serves the good of the country, not the political ends of any party or the fortunes of any person. - Patrick Leahy