[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 26, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S142-S143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRIAL OF DONALD JOHN TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. A quorum is present.
Under the previous order, the hour of 2:30 p.m. having arrived and a
quorum having been established, the Senate will proceed to
consideration of the Article of Impeachment against Donald John Trump,
the former President of the United States.
The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, at this time, pursuant to rule IV of the
Senate Rules on Impeachment and the U.S. Constitution, the President
pro tempore emeritus, the Senator from Iowa, will now administer the
oath to the President pro tempore, Patrick J. Leahy.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Please raise your right hand. Your hand is on the
Bible.
Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of
the impeachment of Donald John Trump, former President of the United
States, now pending, that you will do impartial justice according to
the Constitution and the laws, so help you God?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I do, so help me God.
At this time I will administer the oath to all Senators in the
Chamber in conformance with article I, section 3, clause 6 of the
Constitution and the Senate impeachment rules.
Will all Senators now rise and raise their right hands.
Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of
the impeachment of Donald John Trump, former President of the United
States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the
Constitution and laws, so help you God?
SENATORS. I do.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the names in groups of
four. The Senators will present themselves at the desk to sign the Oath
Book.
The legislative clerk called the roll, and the Senators present
answered ``I do'' and signed the Official Oath Book.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Acting Sergeant at Arms will make the
proclamation.
The Acting Sergeant at Arms, Jennifer Hemingway, made the
proclamation as follows:
Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye! All persons are commanded to keep silent,
on pain of imprisonment, while the House of Representatives is
exhibiting to the Senate of the United States the Article of
Impeachment against Donald John Trump, former President of the United
States.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, article II, section 4 of the Constitution
says: ``The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the
United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and
Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and
Misdemeanors.''
Article I, section 3, clause 6 states: ``When the President of the
United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.''
As of noon last Wednesday, Donald Trump holds none of the positions
listed in the Constitution. He is a private citizen. The Presiding
Officer is not the Chief Justice, nor does he claim to be. His presence
in the Chief Justice's absence demonstrates that this is not a trial of
the President but of a private citizen.
Point of Order
Therefore, I make a point of order that this proceeding, which would
try a private citizen and not a President, a Vice President, or civil
officer, violates the Constitution and is not in order.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the precedents of the Senate
regarding constitutional points of order, including those of the Senate
while sitting as a Court of Impeachment, the Chair submits the question
to the Senate: Is the point of order well taken?
The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, the theory that the impeachment of a
former official is unconstitutional is flat-out wrong by every frame of
analysis: constitutional text, historical practice, precedent, and
basic common sense. It has been completely debunked by constitutional
scholars from all across the political spectrum.
Now, the junior Senator from Kentucky read one clause from the
Constitution about the Senate's impeachment powers. He left out another
from article I, section 3: ``Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not
extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to
hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United
States.
If the Framers intended impeachment to merely be a vehicle to remove
sitting officials from their office, they would not have included that
additional provision: disqualification from future office. The
Constitution also gives the Senate the ``sole power'' to try all
impeachments.
So what did past Senates decide on this question? In 1876, President
Grant's Secretary of War, William Belknap, literally raced to the White
House to tender his resignation before the House was set to vote on his
impeachment. Not only did the House move forward with the impeachment,
but the Senate convened a trial and voted as a Chamber that Mr. Belknap
could be tried ``for acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his
resignation of said office.''
The language is crystal clear, without any ambiguity. The history and
precedent is clear. The Senate has the power to try former officials,
and the reasons for that are basic common sense. It makes no sense
whatsoever that a President or any official could commit a heinous
crime against our country and then defeat Congress's impeachment powers
and avoid disqualification by simply resigning or by waiting to commit
that offense until their last few weeks in office.
The theory that the Senate can't try former officials would amount to
a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card for any President who
commits an impeachable offense.
Ironically, the Senator from Kentucky's motion would do an injury to
the Constitution by rendering the disqualification clause effectively
moot. So, again, by constitutional text, precedent, and common basic
sense, it is clearly and certainly constitutional to hold a trial for a
former official. Former President Trump committed, in the view of many,
including myself, the gravest offense ever committed by a President of
the United States.
The Senate will conduct a trial of the former President, and Senators
will render judgment on his conduct.
Motion to Table
Therefore, the point of order is ill-founded and, in any case,
premature. If Senators want this issue debated, it can and will be
argued during the trial. Therefore, I move to table the point of order,
and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 55, nays 45, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 8]
YEAS--55
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Collins
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lujan
Manchin
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Romney
Rosen
Sanders
Sasse
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Toomey
[[Page S143]]
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--45
Barrasso
Blackburn
Blunt
Boozman
Braun
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Paul
Portman
Risch
Rounds
Rubio
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Wicker
Young
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 55, the nays
are 45.
The motion to table is agreed to; the point of order is not
sustained.
The majority leader.
Providing For Related Procedures Concerning The Article Of Impeachment
Against Donald John Trump, President Of The United States
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I have a resolution to organize the
pretrial proceedings at the desk.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the resolution by
title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 16) to provide for related procedures
concerning the article of impeachment against Donald John
Trump, President of the United States.
Mr. SCHUMER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll
The result was announced--yeas 83, nays 17, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 9]
YEAS--83
Baldwin
Barrasso
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Booker
Boozman
Braun
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cramer
Crapo
Duckworth
Durbin
Ernst
Feinstein
Fischer
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Hoeven
Inhofe
Kaine
Kelly
Kennedy
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Leahy
Lujan
Lummis
Manchin
Markey
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Portman
Reed
Romney
Rosen
Rounds
Sanders
Sasse
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
Young
NAYS--17
Blackburn
Cotton
Cruz
Daines
Hagerty
Hawley
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Lee
Marshall
Paul
Risch
Rubio
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Tuberville
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 83, the nays
are 17.
The resolution (S. Res. 16) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under ``Submitted
Resolutions.'')
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
____________________