Nixon v. U.S. Case Brief

Senate Rule XI allows a committee of Senate members to hear the Impeachment trial and bring back the facts of the case to the entire Senate; then for the entire Senate to make a ruling. This rule was the basis for Nixo

In the 1962 case Baker v. Carr, the Supreme Court determined that their case was justiciable, unlike this case. Baker v. Carr helped to determine what cases could be considered nonjusticiable. Nonjusticiable cases “involve a political question-where there is ‘a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it” (Baker v. Carr). In this case the commitment to another branch, being the Legislative Branch, is very evident, as will be latter stated in the section titled reasons.

The courts decided that Nixon’s claim that the Senate Rule XI did violate Article I Section III Clause 6 in the constitution. However, it is nonjusticiable and the courts cannot try the case.

This case is nonjusticiable. There is an evident commitment to another branch of government, namely the Legislative Branch. The Supreme Co

Some topics in this essay:
Rule XI, Supreme Court, III Clause, Baker Carr, Chief Justice, Article Section, House Representatives, Impeachment Clause, Walter Nixon, Senate Senate, senate rule, article section, senate rule xi, rule xi, article section iii, iii clause, 6 constitution, clause 6, iii clause 6, section iii clause, section iii, legislative branch, supreme court, clause 6 constitution, baker carr,