Into the Night
Contributor
Nope. The act of impeachment never occurred. The House just voted on it. Queen Nancy never actually impeached.
Trump signals he will use executive privilege to block Bolton testimony in Senate
- Thread starter Cinnabar
- Start date
Nope. The act of impeachment never occurred. The House just voted on it. Queen Nancy never actually impeached.
You must have not read the articles of impeachment. Congress and executive agencies can be obstructed just like judicial proceedings.
Read the law, it clearly includes congressional investigations:
Obstructing Congressional or Administrative Proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1505)
Section 1505 outlaws interfering with Justice Department civil investigative demands issued in antitrust cases.88 However, it deals primarily with obstructing congressional or federal administrative proceeding
Into the Night
Contributor
Correct. It applies to enforcement authority or judicial authority. It does not apply to legislative authority.
Because they ignored subpoenas from the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has judicial authority.
WRONG. The House does not have power of subpoena. Neither does the Senate UNLESS they are trying an impeachment. Otherwise, they MUST go through the courts.
The Constitution requires the House to impeach and they have done so. What constitutional provision requires the speaker to take any action?
Into the Night
Contributor
They list no crime. Therefore, there is nothing to try.
Nope. They do not have power of subpoena.
Nope.
Proceedings is obstructing a House acting as a House. They do not have power of subpoena.
Yes, it's illegal to prevent the House from holding a vote or conducting its business in that House. Neither house has power of subpoena.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
If Bolton was a real man and had some balls- He would have eagerly blown the whistle on Trump- without even having to be asked!
Why is there something Fucked up about every Republican?
Vote these immoral, corrupt, and unscrupulous assholes out! You can't trust them!
Why is there something Fucked up about every Republican?
Vote these immoral, corrupt, and unscrupulous assholes out! You can't trust them!
Not according to the U. S. Constitution. Where does it say anything about the "act of filing" or actions required by the speaker?
According to the rules and procedures of the House: "The respondent in an impeachment proceeding is impeached by the adoption of the House of articles of impeachment."
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-115/pdf/GPO-HPRACTICE-115.pdf
Chapter 27 on impeachment also has a good discussion of impeachable offenses.
Violence and tampering would usually be more applicable to judicial proceedings. The obstruction laws are not limited to the judicial branch and apply to administrative hearings and congressional investigations.
Thus, the title of section 1505: obstruction of pending congressional or federal administrative proceeding.
A pending congressional proceeding is obviously separate from a court but still illegal to obstruct.
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Congressional subpoena power are not illimitable. The courts would determine their limitations in the case of another coequal branch of government.
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Up to the courts to determine legally. Impeachment is a political tool not judicial authority .
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Exactly
Yes, the House has the power to subpoena.
One of the many mentions of the House subpoena power in the Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures of the House says:
"To carry out its duties, each committee and each subcommittee is authorized by clause 2(m) of rule XI to hold hearings and to subpoena witnesses or compel the production of documents."
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-115/pdf/GPO-HPRACTICE-115.pdf
The Supreme Court did not subpoena documents from Nixon, it ruled Nixon had to turn over the subpoenaed documents to the federal district court that had been subpoenaed by Jaworski.
True, and those courts can also order the subpoenaed documents turned over.
Correct, if the person is being charged under criminal law. But since this is not a criminal case but a political impeachment it is the function of the House to determine if the president's actions constituted an impeachable offense and it did so by a majority vote.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that it has no role in the impeachment process.
"The majority opinion, by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, held that the courts may not review the impeachment and trial of a federal officer because the Constitution reserves that function to a coordinate political branch. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution gives the Senate the "sole power to try all impeachments." Because of the word sole it is clear that the judicial branch was not to be included. Furthermore, because the word try was originally understood to include factfinding committees, there was a textually demonstrable commitment to give broad discretion to the Senate in impeachments.
Furthermore the Framers believed that representatives of the people should try impeachments, and the Court was too small to justly try impeachments. Also, the judicial branch is "checked" by impeachments, so judicial involvement in impeachments might violate the doctrine of the separation of powers."
A veto is a constitutional power as part of the legislative process. They did not prevent the law from being passed or prevent the president from vetoing it.
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Simply, The courts dont participate in political questions just judicial questions. However, the courts are responsible for ruling on upholding the separation of powers doctrine.
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Correction
Instead of upholding, interpreting is a better term to use above.
The law is much broader than holding a vote or conducting business.
It includes influences, obstructs, impedes the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress.
Refusing to give subpoenaed documents impedes the progress of that investigation.
However, this is all moot since the House already voted to impeach and determined the charges were impeachable offenses. They have the sole power to make this decision.
Agreed. And since the Constitution specifically grants the impeachment power to Congress there is no violation of the separation of powers.
they can.
but the point is it's not any offense like "Obstruction of Congress" for POTUS to appeal to the courts over a subpoena