Debate Thread: Is Blago entitled to due process of law?

Good summary; except Hastings Senate conviction was overturned by a District Court but didn’t go the Supreme Court. The case was returned to the Senate to await the Supreme Court’s decision in US v. Walter Nixon (1993), another federal judge who was impeached. Nixon was challenging the fact his Senate trial was held before a panel of 12 Senators and not the full Senate. The question before the Court was whether the Senate rule allowing the panel could be reviewed by the courts.

The Court ruled 9-0 that the courts could not review the Senate procedures since the Constitution gave the Senate the sole power to conduct impeachment trials. Hastings was challenging his impeachment on the grounds he was acquitted of the charges.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/506/224/case.html

So basically whatever the State Senate’s procedures are, that’s what will govern Blago’s impeachment, no matter how unfair they may seem. And the decsion cannot be appealed to the courts.

That is a perfect analogy, Buckeye Texan. The impeachment of a public official means that he has been indicted. Under the federal Constitution this function is performed by the house. Once impeached (indicted)by the house, a trial is held by the Senate to determine whether he should be removed from office.

Under the federal constitution, the ONLY issue that can be decided by impeachment by the House and a trial in the Senate is whether to remove an official from office. Any criminal or civil penalties are entirely separate issues, and would be conducted in a court of law.

As was so elegantly stated by DeepThought42, the actions of the legislative body in an impeachment and trial are not open to judicial review, as they occur solely within the framework of the constitution, and are not therefore subject to any of the laws and regulations passed by the government, such being subordinate to the constitution. The check and balance to the authority of Congress in such matters is the constitutionally mandated limitation that the only penalty Congress may impose upon someone convicted by the Senate is their removal from office: Congress has no authority to try an accused for any other crimes or questions, such authority being solely reserved to the Judiciary. Likewise, the Judiciary may not order a federal official removed from elective or judicial office following a conviction (recall the Ted Stevens case).

I assume that the IL constitution has established a system similar to the federal one, but I have not read the IL constitution, nor am I likely to get a burning desire anytime soon to do so.

Everyone is entitled to due process, even a student about to be expelled from school. The point is, due process in a CRIMINAL trial is a lot more restrictive, than due process in a CIVIL proceeding.

That is why Hastings was wrong in the Supreme Court, and Blago is wrong (and wildly self-delusional) now.

John ; Billybob

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.