Is it true that the Senate has to vote to have a trial for the impeachment, and they can simply just kill the whole thing right there?
Even before the Chief Justice just to enter the building.
- Justin ThymeLv 73 months agoFavorite Answer
The Senate could vote on impeachment despite the fact that Pelosi has not handed over the Articles of Impeachment. I have a feeling that if they did that, the Democrats would then accuse the Senate of corruption and the MSM would back them up on that lie.
- busterwasmycatLv 73 months ago
The Constitution declares that the Senate must hold a trial "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments". The Constitution also says that the Chief Justice shall preside over the impeachment trial of a President. Based on that, I do not see that it is consistent with the Constitution for the Senate to dismiss the charges without having a trial and before the Chief Justice presides.
This does not mean that the Senate cannot make that attempt to just ignore the impeachment vote coming from the House. It simply means that I do not believe it would be legal. It definitely would be defiance of the intent of the Constitution to see the trial of any who have been impeached. Legal interpretations are different from intent or even letter of the law, so unless the Supreme Court weighs in for some reason, the Senate can pretty well do whatever it wants as a practical thing. That is another bit out of the Constitution: the House and Senate make their own rules for procedures.
- RonLv 63 months ago
I think the majority of people in America would want that
- Anonymous3 months ago
I think it's time we took away the right to vote from 18-20 year olds. They're far too immature to give this right to