The idea that the Senate can wait until after President Trump leaves office to try him on any articles of impeachment from the House is the latest gambit of the Democrats. We understand that scholars differ on whether that would be constitutionally kosher. Count us as among those who see it as an unconstitutional and thuggish strategy calculated to prevent Mr. Trump from challenging the Democrats in 2024.

It’s not our purpose here to suggest that Mr. Trump should run in 2024 or could win. He’s hinted, though, that he might try, and it’s easy to see why, given that 74 million voters cast ballots for him in November. The only candidate who’s ever bested that number is President-elect Biden, who may not seek a second term. So the Democrats are desperate to find a way to bar Mr. Trump from making another attempt at the presidency.

This was evident from the letter Speaker Pelosi sent today to members of the House. She said the House would start by calling on Vice President Pence to set in motion an effort to sideline the President through the 25th Amendment, which empowers Mr. Pence and half the cabinet to declare the president unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. She also said the House would begin considering articles of impeachment but set no date.

The strategy, the New York Post is reporting, would be to hold off on a trial in the Senate for 100 days. That, the Post suggests, would be to give Mr. Biden a chance to focus on his key priorities during his first months in office. One of the most powerful congressmen, Jim Clyburn, on Sunday backed the idea of delaying a Senate trial, provoking what the Washington Post called “widespread frustration” among Democrats.

Hence the question of whether it would be constitutional for the Senate to try Mr. Trump after he’s left office. The parchment says that the House has the sole power of impeachment. “Judgment in cases of impeachment,” it adds, “shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office” under the United States.

Then the Constitution says this: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” So we are hard put to see where the Framers could be interpreted as having intended to grant the Senate the power to try someone who is no longer an officer of the United States.

One giveaway, by our lights, is that the Constitution insists that a party convicted by the Senate remains “subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment” in the regular courts. For a sitting president, impeachment is a necessary step, because a sitting president can’t be prosecuted easily, if at all. Impeachment isn’t needed for a former president, because he can be prosecuted any time the government sees fit.

Then again, too, it’s not so clear that the Democrats could force a trial in the Senate while Mr. Trump is still in office, even if they wanted to do so. The Senate is not scheduled to be back in session again until January 19. So even if the House rushed its articles of impeachment to the solons that morning, it would be nigh impossible to get a trial over and done before Mr. Trump’s presidency ends at noon on the 20th.

After that, Mr. Trump could be charged with a crime, if there is one, in the regular courts. Regular courts, though, aren’t granted the power that the Senate would have to disqualify Mr. Trump from holding office in the future. Since that seems to be the goal of the impeachment process the Democrats seek, we are back where we started. A better strategy for Mr. Biden might be trying to unify the country the old fashioned way — at the polls.