ABSTRACT
In Chapter 1, it is argued that to the extent that the American public and any elected representatives endorse the position that there was a purported lack of Senate jurisdiction to conduct the second impeachment trial of the then already former U.S. President—and even though the U.S. Senate had taken a vote affirming jurisdiction—it serves to undermine the democratic rule of law. There is arguably no bar in the U.S. Constitution to a Senate trial of an impeached living former U.S. federal civil (including a former President) who resigns or whose term of office expires before the Senate trial and/or verdict is rendered. Also examined is the issue of any alleged First Amendment protection regarding Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech to those gathered at the ellipse near the Capitol for which the House charged Trump with incitement to insurrection. The latter is relevant to the question of the Senate’s jurisdiction in holding former President Trump accountable for any purported constitutional offence implicated by his January 6, 2021, speech communicated to the public as a then sitting U.S. President.
