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)I don't see any court taking the case, but if one did... I think it's pretty clear that "the power to try all impeachments" would be interpreted to mean that if an impeachment exists... the Senate can try it. But the court doesn't have the power to determine whether or not an impeachment exists... because the House has the sole power to do that. My opinion has always been that "the House" or "the Senate" can only speak through majority votes. So when an impeachment vote is held and it passes... an impeachment exists.
But I could see a court deferring to the House regarding whether or not one exists. They could plausibly claim that the impeachment process includes the naming of managers and the conveying of the Articles to the Senate. Then and only then does an impeachment exist (and thus then and only then does the Senate have the power to hold the trial).
That scenario would allow Pelosi to delay as long as she wants... or even decline to proceed... but it would also mean that impeachment didn't happen.