re: SCOTUS isn’t going to mess with immunity

To just add

The clause (which separates the 2 concepts) is initially framed around "Judgment in cases of impeachment"

That is the reason why they clarify "the party convicted" can still face criminal prosecution.

Like boosie said, "nevertheless" should make this clear.

quote:

---

Again, that line is just saying that a party convicted by the Senate may still face criminal prosecution (following the trend of the clause in separating the two actions).

---

That’s the interpretation that you were taught. It may be the interpretation that the USSC would agree with.

It doesn’t say what you pretend it says.

quote:

---

Nowhere does it make it a requirement

---

One could make a real strong argument otherwise. The language limits prosecution to the convicted party.

quote:

---

The clear theme and intent of the clause is to separate the two concepts. That's why people keep asking for those trying to link them to find the language doing so.

---

Maybe. I can say for certain you haven’t made a persuasive case for that.

Let’s be honest. You only have that opinion because you were told to. You aren’t interpreting this on your own.