What is the judicial parallel? Can a person's indictment be expunged after a trial finds him not guilty? That would result in the existence of a trial without a predicate indictment of charges. Is that allowed in our legal system?
I can possibly see it in the situation where a trial is dismissed by the judge for lack of evidence, and then the person moves to have the indictment expunged, but not after a full trial and finding of not guilty.
If an indictment is expunged after a trial finding of not guilty, can the person be charged again? How would double-jeopardy apply in the case where there is a trial but no underlying charges?
Back to impeachment, if an impeachment is expunged after a trial in the Senate, can the person be impeached again as if the first impeachment never happened? What about the prior trial on the now non-existent impeachment?
I don't think this would be found to be Constitutional if it were brought to the Supreme Court. There are just too many unresolved questions to think that the Framers intended an act like this to happen.
-PJ
You have just proved my point. This is something stupid people will argue about and their eye will be off the ball. Thank you for being triggered. I am not calling you stupid, but many people that will blow their stacks over this are. Your visceral anger shows in your post. What can we pass when you guys are pissed.
Welcome to LTGM 2.0 Nicer, more concise and brutally honest. (I am a gray beard working on himself) God help you because he is helping me.
Not guilty verdicts cannot be appealed but a guilty impeachment should be allowed to be appealed?
Imagine that you find yourself accused of using the Evil Eye curse on your crazy neighbor's cat, and a coalition of municipal employees, who already hate you, decide to form a tribunal star chamber and put you on "trail". A dog-catcher, a crosswalk guard, and a school cafeteria cook attempt to convict you of practicing malicious magic, but they can't find an expert on evil mischief who can properly describe your crime and they can't even find the cat. They quietly dissolve the trium and abandon the proceeding, but they triumphantly march to the courthouse to permanently file in government record that you were "tried" for something that is both nonsensical and impossible.
The record of this ridiculous event follows you everywhere you go in your life. It is continually reemerging, without context, for every occasional background check, requiring that you continually supply the missing context and re-explain the whole ordeal. The objective recounting of the event is, itself, so absurd that people reflexively doubt YOUR own version of the event and you find that this episode has permanently tainted your reputation.
Would you not want the record corrected to report that you were NOT, in fact, properly brought to trail and that, instead, you were the victim of a criminal misuse and abuse of power?
I think you have valid points. Plus, I don’t believe the Dem’s ever do anything to be noble. So, I’m suspicious.