Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
It’s a lively session in the faculty lounge as professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo parse the case for impeachment, and analyze some of the biggest cases coming before the Supreme Court: will a new lineup of justices change the Court’s approach to abortion regulation? Will a ruling about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau deal a blow to the administrative state? Are gay and transgendered employees protected by the 1964 Civil Rights Act?All that plus a detour into antiquities law, a (partial) endorsement of imperialism, a POTUS busted for speeding, and an answer to America’s most burning legal question: could the president literally shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not pay a price?
Subscribe to Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Senik in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
I love Law Talk. Please, keep providing us with (weekly?) Podcast.
A jury is sometimes offered alternative verdicts – First Degree vs Second Degree Murder vs Manslaughter. Could McConnell or Roberts offer the Senate an option of Conviction on Impeachment or Censure if the Senate finds that Trump overstepped with his quid pro quo?
I thought the question in Morrison v. Olsen was whether or not a judicial branch officer could wield a limited amount of executive power. The independent counsel under that statute was appointed by a panel of judges. The question in that case wasn’t whether the independent counsel could be fired, but whether the judicial branch could appoint an officer who wielded executive power at all. The court said yes because the power was so narrow.
Dismissal wasn’t directly discussed if I recall. It wasn’t the President trying to fire the independent counsel, it was Ted Olson trying to stop the investigation from even happening.
I have a vague recollection of Censure being done almost like a resolution rather than as alternative punishment. This is the first time I have heard of them being formally connected.
Finally!
@richardepstein mentions what I’ve been saying ever since I read the Constitution:
Impeachment and conviction does NOT require removal from office
except in cases of Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The Senate can try any impeachment any way it wishes, as long as it is done on oath or affirmation, with the Chief Justice presiding over the trial.
So of course the Senate could consider any variety of sentences for any variety of offenses, lesser included or no (except in cases of Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors).
Well, it finally happened: the gang had a conversation about the Greeks losing their marbles.