Justiciability

Which is a massive constitutional no-no.

Article III of the US Constitution strictly prohibits federal courts from giving advisory opinions.

That limitation is the beating heart of Article III.

Federal judicial power extends only to specific live cases and controversies.

You can't just walk into a federal courthouse and ask a judge, "Hey, does this proposed law sound constitutional to you?"

He claimed the Senate didn't try him properly because they used a committee to hear the evidence instead of the full Senate floor.

And the Supreme Court refused to hear his claim, invoking the political question doctrine.

Why? Because Article One of the Constitution explicitly says, "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Federal courts do not possess a roving commission to just issue advisory opinions or answer hypothetical constitutional questions whenever judges think an issue is important.

Justiciability is the constitutional doctrine that restricts judicial power exclusively to actual cases and controversies.

To put that in perspective, back in seventeen ninety-three, President George Washington actually asked the Supreme Court for legal advice on neutrality treaties.

Chief Justice John Jay politely declined.