By the time Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial began, he had left office. Senators therefore debated whether the Constitution allowed the Senate to try a former president for acts committed while in office.
The Senate voted to proceed with the trial. Supporters of jurisdiction argued that impeachment could otherwise be avoided by resignation or expiration of a term, and that the Senate could consider disqualification from future office. Opponents argued that the constitutional process applies only to current officeholders.
The Senate’s procedural decision permitted the trial to continue, but it did not resolve every scholarly dispute about late impeachment. The final verdict remained an acquittal because the vote to convict fell short of two-thirds.
The jurisdiction dispute involved the distinction between removal from office and possible disqualification from future office. Senators reached different conclusions about post-term trials.
The Senate trial began after Trump had left office. Senators disputed whether the Constitution allowed the trial of a former president. A majority voted to proceed, but the final vote to convict was 57 to 43, below the two-thirds threshold required for conviction. Seven Republican senators joined all 50 senators in the Democratic caucus in voting guilty. The Senate therefore acquitted Trump.
The jurisdictional dispute turned on whether the Senate could try an impeachment after the accused official's term had ended. Supporters of jurisdiction pointed to the Constitution's disqualification remedy and historical practice. Opponents argued that the removal power no longer applied to a former president.
The Senate proceeded with the trial after voting that it had jurisdiction. That procedural decision did not settle the constitutional debate for all future cases, and it did not decide whether the charged conduct warranted conviction. Keeping the jurisdiction vote separate from the final merits vote makes the history easier to follow.