Posted on 12/20/2019 12:06:10 PM PST by NobleFree
[GianCarlo Canaparo is a legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies.]
[...] Let’s start with the Constitution. Article 1, Section 2 states that the House “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” Section 3 states that the Senate “shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”
Critically, there is no mention of procedure here. So where does this supposed transmittal requirement come from? The answer is the Senate’s own rules. Specifically, its rules governing impeachment procedure.
The first rule of impeachment procedure states that the Senate will not act on an impeachment until the House sends to the Senate its appointed “managers”— the representatives who will act as the lawyers during the impeachment trial. After the House has presented its managers to the Senate, then the Senate takes the reins and launches its trial.
So can Pelosi delay an impeachment trial? Yes, as long as the Senate doesn’t change its current rules. But there’s absolutely nothing stopping it from changing this rule, and the Senate should change the rule to prevent this sort of gamesmanship.
[...] So the Senate should change its impeachment rules as follows: once the House has impeached the president, the Senate shall set a date for trial and shall set a deadline for the House to present its managers to the Senate. If the House fails to meet that deadline, the Senate will either dismiss the articles of impeachment for lack of prosecution or, better yet, vote on the articles immediately in light of the evidence presented to it — in this case, no evidence.
Having set this boulder rolling, House Democrats should not be allowed now to hold it up. They started this process. It’s up to the Senate to finish it on its terms alone. Not Pelosi’s.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
PDJT just tweeted that what Pelosi is doing by withholding the articles of impeachment in order to get what she wants from the Senate is tantamount to QUID PRO QUO!!!
How many votes are needed for a rule change? I think the “nuclear option” was accomplished by pretending that 51 votes was 60 votes.
My suggestion is that the House will have to submit their impeachment to the Senate to find out what rules are in use.
When the House submits the articles to the Senate, the Senate will then appoint a team to examine the charges, and conduct a brief enquiry to ensure that no exculpatory evidence has been omitted. If it is shown that exculpatory evidence was withheld then the matter should be dismissed as not meeting Senate due process requirements.
Assuming that the articles of impeachment pass this brief audit then the Senate is to appoint a prosecution team drawn from Senate its Members and summons the Chief justice of the Supreme court to preside over the Trial.
It isn’t “bending” to anything.
It’s taking a big dump down Pelosi’s mouth.
Good points.
The Senate can change the rules and state that “Only the Speaker of the House may present an impeachment case on the Senate floor”.
Such a rule change could ultimately force Pelosi out as Speaker if the Democrats decide she is incapable of presenting the case.
I figure McTurtle and the RINO’s will ring their hands and let this thing linger on and on and on while Nancy sits on it indefinitely all year then when the RINO’s lose the Senate she will move it over just in time for the new leader, Chuck the Schmuck to take it up. Once they chunk Trump then they will go after Pence.
My fear is we are entering a phase where Democrats will start interpreting law and the Constitution with the kind of confusion that multitudes of Christians have interpreted scripture. In other words you’ll have a zillion different interpretations of everything making it powerless as a legal guide. Democrats will interpret it in whatever way they see fit for whatever purpose they want and that they think they can get away with.
The 2A has never been more relevant than right now.
I agree Honest Nigerian. McConnell has already extolled the virtues of tradition and precedent, and condemned the Dems for rushing their “investigation”. Arbitrarily changing the Senate’s rules cedes the high ground. Since the Dems can gin up as many impeachment votes as they want, there is no advantage in pushing this one to the trial phase. Let it rot.
The House voted to impeach Judge John Pickering on March 2, 1803 on charges of drunkenness and unlawful rulings, although he had committed neither “high crimes nor misdemeanors”, which are grounds for impeachment under the Constitution.
...........
The Senate tried Pickering beginning January 4, 1804. The Senate convicted Pickering of all charges by a vote of 19 to 7 on March 12, 1804.
...........
The trial began a year after he was impeached.
“Such a rule change”
.................
Would require a Constitutional Amendment.........
Pelosi powerless to delay Trump impeachment trial if Senate does THIS
... one weird thing!
ROFL!
Very interesting.
That’s right.
Take off the gloves!
This one had me laughing to tears. Thanks.
False.
Whatever they do, they cannot do it with the thought of being REASONABLE with the dims.
The Left is NOT Capable of thinking with REASON.
You could try to play to their emotions, that’s all they are. But reasonable won’t be understood.
With a leader like Mitch, as he has recently displayed, chances are there will be a thoughtful solution, but whatever it is, Nancy and her thugs will HATE it.
That is all they know. So, don’t rely on them and proceed with speed.
You say “False”.
............
We were discussing to following proposal:
.........
“Only the Speaker of the House may present an impeachment case on the Senate floor”.
..........
That proposition would change the relationship and impeachment jurisdiction between the Senate and the House that are currently mandated only by the Constitution.
.........
How do you propose to do that without changing the Constitution?
That proposition would change the relationship and impeachment jurisdiction between the Senate and the House that are currently mandated only by the Constitution.
How?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.