B-but, but… The Burn Bags??? The grand jury in Florida??? The conspiracy against rights???
Kash gotta stick around to cover for that stuff, right?
(If you don’t know what I’m talking about, keep it that way. This is like the dumbest bullshit I’ve ever heard, and I’ve heard a lotta bullshit. )
Double jeopardy is not a factor in this situation, because the first jeopardy “does not attach” until a jury is seated and sworn in for trial, or when a guilty plea is accepted. The trial by jury is the “jeopardous” part of the criminal justice process. If the case is tossed before that point for any reason, then there is no jeopardy bar to refiling.
If a trial starts, but ends in a mistrial, then it is usually possible to go to another trial, even though jeopardy “has attached”. A mistrial ruling effectively “unwinds” the entire trial like it never happened.
or is it like an annulment where it kind of never happened?
This is what Judge Currie said in her opinion. The indictments didn’t happen because they were run entirely by a pretend US attorney.
I am not looking forward to potential litigation on that question.
[The Senators and Representatives] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Beach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
This form of exercise is called aerobics. It is not yoga.
The speech and debate clause is separate from the arrest clause. The Treason exception only applies to the first part.
Additionally, Treason has a definition elsewhere in this document, and just giving any kind of speech doesn’t meet the standard.
It would be pretty hard to claim that any kind of speechifying amounts to “Aid and Comfort”, especially if you can’t identify the “Enemy” in a time when the nation is at peace.
Now the first amendment does apply here, but I expect a legal defense to go to this speech and debate clause first, then 1st amendment. Because 1st amendment has a bunch of exceptions of the “yelling fire in a crowded theater” type, but speech and debate is going to be more ironclad. Once you convince a court that you were doing Congressional speech or debate, then the only discipline you can face is from your chamber’s rules, period.