The committee to which this task is confided [by the House of Representatives] must hear evidence—great masses of it in a complicated case. At this stage it seems certain that no technical “rules of evidence” apply. (Indeed, I shall argue later that they do not apply even in the Senate trial.) Evidence may come from investigations by committee staff, from grand jury matter made available to the committee, or from any other source. Testimony before the committee, and the production of documents or other objects, may be compelled by subpoena—which is an order for appearance, or production, under the threat of criminal penalty. In addition to evidentiary matters, the committee must also consider whether the acts shown probably to have been committed are “impeachable” within the meaning of the constitutional text (of which much more will be said in Chapter 3). What part is to be played at this stage by lawyers of the person under investigation would seem to rest in the sound discretion of the committee. Where the committee concludes, on the facts and on the law, that one or more impeachable offenses are shown with sufficient clarity to justify trial, the committee reports, to the full House of Representatives, its recommendation that one or more “Articles of Impeachment” be adopted.
Black, Charles L., Jr. & Bobbitt, Phillip, Impeachment: A Handbook, New Edition (2018) (pp. 8-9). Yale University Press. Kindle Edition.
No comments:
Post a Comment