January 20, 2017 | Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. swears in President Elect Donald J. Trump. (photo: Getty Images)
16 December 19
Everything I do during this [trial preparation], I’m coordinating with White House counsel … There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this … I’m going to take my cues from the president’s lawyers.
– Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell speaking with Sean Hannity
on Fox Broadcasting, December 12, 2019.
hat’s
a stark and unequivocal statement of intent by Republican Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. He’s on record saying he has no
intention of facilitating anything resembling a fair trial of the
impeachment charges against Donald Trump.
What role does that leave
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts cast in?
The Constitution provides that the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court is to preside over an impeachment trial in the Senate
should it reach that stage. But it’s not clear what “preside” actually
means. Most constitutional experts agree that it is the Senate that sets
the rules, whatever rules the Senate deems appropriate. That would seem
to leave no power whatsoever in the hands of the presiding Supreme
Court Chief Justice.
But the intent of the framers was certainly not to
facilitate a sham impeachment trial, and Roberts undoubtedly understands
that. If McConnell’s statement in and of itself amounts to an act of
misconduct and he is to be taken literally, then the coming trial will
surely violate at least the intent of the framers at a bare minimum.
Knowing that in advance creates a dilemma for Roberts.
He has been served notice that he will be asked to preside over what
the Senate leader openly admits will be a sham trial, in effect making
Roberts a co-abuser of the Constitution, with or without his consent.
That’s not good for the country, the reputation of the Senate, or the
reputation of the Supreme Court.
Are Roberts, his reputation, and the reputation of the
Court mere passengers on a hijacked impeachment trial express to Sham
City? Is Roberts indeed powerless to safeguard the process in any way?
Perhaps, but perhaps not. What if, in light of
McConnell’s clear statement of intent in advance to misconduct the
Senate impeachment trial, Roberts held out, in effect not agreeing to
preside unless he were guaranteed the powers needed to ensure what every
United States senator, including McConnell, swore in their oath, to “do
impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me
God.”
McConnell is apparently more than willing to trample
on the Constitution and the Republic by putting the Senate under the
direct control of the President. Will Roberts consent to allow the
Supreme Court to become a co-participant and tool of the Executive
Branch as well? Caution: This is consequential.
Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.
No comments:
Post a Comment