Harris doesn't vote on the impeachment trial; the Chief Justice presides, but I'm not sure he has a vote, and that would only apply to any procedural matters, I think. But there are no ties possible on the impeachment trial vote: 2/3 is 2/3: at least twice as many yea as nay votes, and exactly 2/3 (presumably 67 as they'd probably get everyone there to vote) is still 2/3.
I hadn't considered that a vote on the ban from ever holding office (and presumably on removing all of the past-presidential perks) would only need a majority, on which VP Harris could break ties, but it does seem plausible to me. There are no precedents here of which I'm aware.
I keep seeing people saying that the courts would get involved, including and up to the Supreme Court. I'm pretty sure that at any level, but certainly at the SCOTUS, the answer is "Impeachment is a political trial, and we're not a political court; we're a law court: your case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction."
no subject
I hadn't considered that a vote on the ban from ever holding office (and presumably on removing all of the past-presidential perks) would only need a majority, on which VP Harris could break ties, but it does seem plausible to me. There are no precedents here of which I'm aware.
I keep seeing people saying that the courts would get involved, including and up to the Supreme Court. I'm pretty sure that at any level, but certainly at the SCOTUS, the answer is "Impeachment is a political trial, and we're not a political court; we're a law court: your case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction."