General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Laurence Tribe : the Senate can't require the House, to "immediately" whatever is [View all]FBaggins
(26,727 posts)Again... ignoring Tribe's (correct) earlier analysis that we can't take the metaphor too far.
The prosecution can hold off on having the grand jury issue indictments. But they can't indict... make the indictment public... and then refuse to prosecute until some other party does something that they want. In this case, the laughable parallel would be telling the court that they refuse to bring charges until the court negotiates the rules of the trial with them.
he court doesn't just randomly say "Hey, that one thing that we think should happentrial starts tomorrow."
Oh... that's certainly true. If it takes a few days (or after the holiday break) to pick managers, it would be silly for the Senate to try to force things. They already said that they didn't intend to act until next year anyway and McConnell previously floated the idea of holding the trial through Feb/Mar.
If this is just PR leverage for negotiations, it isn't a big deal (though also not much leverage). It's only an issue if the House actually tries to keep the Senate from holding the trial.
The accused can't claim a right to a speedy trial when there are no charges before the court.
Nope. The right to a speedy trial begins when a grand jury indicts. The exception would be if the indictment is sealed. Unfortunately... not only is this indictment public, the court has to approve sealing indictments anyway.