About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (January 21, 2020)

handle is hein.crs/govbixy0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Resarh Servi kM- Obtaining Witnesses In an Impeachment Trial: Compulsion, Executive Privilege, and the Courts January 21, 2020 The Constitution grants the Senate wide-ranging discretion in the exercise of its sole Power to try all Inpeachments. Beyond the requirements that the Constitution expressly sets forth (Senators sitting in an impeachment trial must be under oath; a two-thirds vote is required to convict; and the Chief Justice presides over a presidential impeachment), the remaining details of any impeachment trial largely lay with the Senate. One procedural choice in the impending trial of President Donald Trump that has received sustained attention is whether the Senate will hear from witnesses, and if so, how many and in what form. The past presidential impeachment trials provide two very different approaches. During the trial of Andrew Johnson, the Senate took live testimony from more than 40 witnesses, subjecting most to examination by House Managers (acting as prosecutors in the impeachment trial) and the President's counsel. In contrast, the Senate took a more constrained approach in the trial of President Bill Clinton, choosing to hear from three witnesses, and then only through videotaped depositions rather than through live questioning on the Senate floor. If the Senate chooses to seek testimony or documents from witnesses in the upcoming trial, it may-much as the House did during its impeachment investigation-find some potential witnesses to be uncooperative. The Senate's chief tool for compelling the disclosure of information is the subpoena. If a witness refuses to comply with an impeachment trial subpoena, the Senate has at least two available mechanisms to enforce its demands. Historically, and as explicitly provided under the Senate's existing impeachment rules, the Senate may punish in a summary way contempts of, and disobedience to, its authority by directing the Sergeant-at-arms to employ such aid and assistance as may be necessary to enforce, execute, and carry into effect the lawful orders. The Senate has relied on this authority on various occasions. For example, during the 1933 impeachment trial of Judge Harold Louderback the Senate authorized, and the Sergeant-at-arms carried out, the arrest and detention of a non-compliant witness, who was then brought before the Senate and ultimately testified. More recently, the Senate has chosen to use the courts to compel compliance with its impeachment trial subpoenas. During the trial of Judge Alcee Hastings, the Senate authorized the Senate Legal Counsel to Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10396 CRS Lega Sidebar Prepaed for Membeivs and Cornm ittees o4 Cor~qress ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most