Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994

Nixon v. United States - Significance, Another Nixon, A Different Impeachment, Simple Words: "try" And "sole"

senate court petitioner rule


Walter Nixon, U.S. District Judge


United States, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

That Senate Rule XI, which allowed a Senate committee to hear evidence against an impeached official and present a report to the full Senate, violated the Constitution's Impeachment Trial Clause.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

David Overlock Stewart

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Kenneth Starr, U.S. Solicitor General

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting



Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

13 January 1993


That Nixon's claim regarding Senate Rule XI was nonjusticiable--that is, it was outside the Court's control, since the Constitution provided that the "Senate shall have sole Power to try any impeachments."

Related Cases

  • Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962).
  • Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).
  • Associated General Contractors v. City of Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656 (1993).
  • Reno v. Catholic Social Services, 509 U.S. 43 (1993).
Ohio Sedition Trial (7 ): 1989 - The Underlying Crimes, Raising The Stakes, The Long Road To The Verdicts Begins, Expensive Acquittals And Mistrials [next] [back] New York v. United States - Significance, Radioactive Waste, "take-title" Provision, Dissent: Upsetting A "delicate Compromise"

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or