Does a federal grand jury have the power to indict a sitting pResident?

May 22, 1807: Former U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr was indicted for treason by a grand jury - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Burr#Conspiracy_and_trial

Question: Does a federal grand jury have the power to indict a sitting pResident for high crimes and misdemeanors? Or does he first need to be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate?

Impeached the indicted. If they could have gone straight to a Grand Jury to indict Clinton they would have...

let's say, he murdered his wife. A Grand jury in the jurisdiction where the murder occurred would have every right in the world to indict him. Any GJ can indict anyone (even a ham sandwich) if they have a crime committed within their jurisdiciton. Impeachment just removes a sitting president from office.

If it did, Clinton would never have finished his second term. I can't remember what impeachment actually does though. Can anybody help me out?

the case moves to the Senate, which can convict the President by the supermajority (two-thirds) vote. If the Senate convicts, the President is removed from office.

Thanks! So even if Bush is impeached, which he won't be with a republican congress, he won't be removed because the Senate won't convict him at all, let alone by a supermajority. Damn the BFEE!!

The House is like a Grand Jury, The Senate is like a Jury.

The House Impeaches, (indicts) the case is heard before the Senate.

A grand (or petit) jury can indict whomever they please. The trial would be continued until a sitting Pres finishes the term, which could include being evicted from office by the Senate.

-Hoot

because you can't really make him testify or go to court? I think the only person who can do anything of substance is the Attorney General.

http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0731_ZS.html

This decision states that "President of the United States, is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.". I presume that this refers to civil lawsuits.

As for criminal indictment:

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm

"n 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties, and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly, but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing validity of our constitutional analysis are consistent with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached. Our view remains that a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution.'

So this means that a crusading DA like Jim Garrison could go after * in 2009?

against former presidents. Has never been done before, though.

he can be sued

(post-Clinton)

he can be tried in the Congress.

I don't think he can be indicted by a criminal court.

but I thought to impeach the proceedings started in the House then he's tried by the Senate?