Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (68432)	4/26/2018 12:14:39 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 364348

>>What would be the mechanism for engaging SCOTUS? They'd just jump in? Let’s take an extreme case as an example. 2/3(+1) of both houses of Congress are Democrats and all of demand impeachment. Since they are in control, they say, “We are impeaching you for spitting on the sidewalk.” Long story short, he is ousted. We know, from Madison and Hamilton's writings in The Federalist, that impeachment was never intended to provide a way of getting rid of a president who was not liked. A high crime or misdemeanor is required in the Constitution and it is reasonably well defined by the precursors from which the phrase was taken, e.g. Common Law, and before that. That usage specifically excluded disliking someone as meeting the criteria, and required some kind of abuse of power. (In fact, iirc, at one point they considered just allowing the next election to deal with any transgression.) Okay, so the president is ousted based on spitting on the sidewalk when that is not the high crime or misdemeanor required by the Constitution. What happens now? The Constitution doesn’t say. But it is the Supreme Court's domain to establish constitutional intent. Certainly, the ousted president would have the right to petition for certiorari and the Court could decide whether to hear it. Moreover, the entire proceeding is run by the Chief Justice who, although he doesn’t vote he presumably functions as a judge in some ways (I don’t remember). Could he not just say, “Where’s the crime?” My point is that the high crime or misdemeanor (abuse of power) isn’t optional. It has never happened so we don’t know, but I would think the Chief Justice might just be able to make the call on the spot. But surely, the last outcome the Framers would have wanted is for a runaway congress to oust a president based on popularity. Seems to me try trial would end by operation of law.