Hypothetical impeachment of Chief Justice

[© tweed]

If the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS was to be impeached, would be preside over his own trial in the senate?

[bullmoose88]

If the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS was to be impeached, would be preside over his own trial in the senate?

Would it be the associate justice with seniority? In which case, John Paul Stevens?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So the Vice President would preside (or in his absence the President pro tem)  Wierldly enough the Vice President would preside at his own impeachment, probably because the Founders figured that no one could possibly get into impeachable trouble as Vice President.

[A18]

Ernest is of course correct. What gave you the idea that he presided in all cases?

An impeached vice president likely would not choose to preside over the proceedings. That role would then fall to the president pro tempore (given the importance of the occasion, I assume it wouldn't be assigned to another senator of the majority party).

[J. J.]

Ernest is of course correct. What gave you the idea that he presided in all cases?

An impeached vice president likely would not choose to preside over the proceedings. That role would then fall to the president pro tempore (given the importance of the occasion, I assume it wouldn't be assigned to another senator of the majority party).

Associate Chase was impeached and Vice President Burr presided, leading to the comment that "The judge appeared before the murderer."

[Emsworth]

The hypothetical issue raised here is, of course, not applicable to the Chief Justice--but it is applicable to the Vice President.

I would argue that, even if he wanted to do so, the Vice President would be unable to preside over his own impeachment--the President pro tempore would have to take the chair. The ban is, I think, implicit in the text of the Constitution.

In England, there were a few instances in which particular individuals had been granted the special right to preside over certain trials--for example, one might have been granted the right to preside over all trials held within a certain geographic area. But, when the individual in question was in fact a party to the case, the courts have held that he may not preside, even though no exception is expressly made by the original grant. Dr. Bonham's Case is a leading example; the College of Physicians was deemed incapable of trying a case in which it was the plaintiff, despite an Act of Parliament granting it authority to try cases (without mentioning any particular exceptions) involving its members. The principle is also affirmed by Blackstone. The same line of reasoning excludes the President of the Senate from taking the chair, and also from casting any tiebreaking votes on motions incident to the trial.