Replies

My thought is most likely no, but anything is possible, just not probable. Treason is the highest of High Crimes (and misdemeanors). It would most likely be dealt with by impeachment and trial.

The general consensus in the legal profession is that the President cannot be arrested or indicted.
Richard Nixon was named by the Watergate Grand Jury as an “unindicted co-conspirator.” Impeachment is the constitutionally mandated quasi- judicial process to remove a treasonous president.

Here’s probably more than you ever wanted to know on the subject:
“A Sitting President’s Amenability To Indictment and Criminal Prosecution:”
http://www.justice.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm

I’ll go with Nero’s “anything is possible”, as I do see Congress as vested with the ultimate authority to set up courts as it sees fit. (That’s not to say Boehner would ever dare venture in that direction. We know a Reid probably wouldn’t for a D president.)

Nero’s cited memorandum has for the most part the context of an envisaged extended period of time wherein the People are served by the orderly continuation of executive functions, which would largely be both trusted and needed to carry out the People’s business.

Unfortunately, the destructive forces readily put in play by a hypothetical usurper could make such a backdrop of the desirability of “staying the course” during months of an impeachment trial for removal be seen differently from the collective wisdom of 1973 and 2000. It is possible Congress would see an immediate need to keep heinous crimes from continuing, akin to the situation where a doctor that has been shown to do harm repeatedly to his patients, so as to give rise to the desire to preclude—even for a day—such a person from continuing to enjoy the license of practicing medicine.

JMHO.