News has it Pelosi is holding off on transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Say she holds off until after the 2020 election. Can the new speaker of the house in 2021 (whoever it is) then be the sole decider of whether or not to transmit them? Or does a new vote need to occur in the house?
The vote is on a House resolution, which is only valid for the 116th Congress. Like all other legislation, a House resolution that is unfinished business will expire upon the adjournment of the Congress, which will probably occur in late December 2020 or very early January 2021, before the next Congress is sworn in (and the Speaker selected).
Related to this, what would happen from a procedural/legal standpoint if Pelosi delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate on the day prior to the congressional adjournment, thereby not giving them enough time to hold a trial?
It’s over. The next House must start again. I mean, one could probably rules-lawyer some unusual scenario in which an early adjournment is delayed - since any adjournment beyond three days is subject to approval by the other house. If the House sends the articles on a Monday, and approves the adjournment sine die of the Senate on Tuesday, there will be no trial on Wednesday.
Not necessarily. This came up in Clinton’s impeachment which was voted on by one Congress and tried in the next. I realize that is not the exact question that you answered, but I’m not sure why the question that the OP asked would be radically different.
You know what, you are right. I’m not sure if that mechanism, but you are correct. I’ll look into it.
ETA: I draw the distinction between the OP (in which the House resolution is not sent over before the end of a Congress) versus the resolution being sent over, and a new Senate being sworn in.
But if the House résolution is sent over before the new House takes office, it’s then in the hands of the Senate, which is a continuing body. Would that have anything to do with it?
Does it change the calculus that unlike most bills which require both houses to pass the bill in order for the next step (presentment to the President) to occur; that because impeachment is complete in itself once passed solely by the House of Representatives that it then stands alone and for all time until disposed of by the Senate, who again acts on its own with regard to the trial?
As I said in the other thread, and keeping in mind that this is GQ, I don’t see any constitutional requirement that a messenger boy hand a parchment paper to the clerk of the opposing house for that house’s vote to count. If the House passes a bill banning monkey hunting in national parks and the Senate passes an identical bill, it can then be presented to the President. No need for messenger boys between the houses, although normally it would be done:
Not a Bill.
Take this hypothetical:
The House votes 434-1 to impeach a President. The dissenting vote is the Speaker.
If the Speaker had control over sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, then that one person could prevent a President from being removed from office.
(With such a lopsided vote, surely the Speaker would be replaced, etc. But there might arise less lopsided situations where somehow the Speaker cannot be easily forced out.)
If I was a judge hearing the matter, I’d say once the vote is officially recorded the Senate can then proceed regardless of the actions of that one person.