Chief Justice John Roberts refusal to preside over former President Donald Trumps second impeachment trial is raising questions about whether he views the first-of-its-kind proceedings as constitutional.
The Supreme Court has been declining to comment when reached by The Post, as well as other outlets, on why its top jurist will not take part in the historic trial.
Speaking to MSNBCs The Rachel Maddow Show on Monday evening, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) revealed that Roberts did not want to take part in the trial.
The Constitution says the chief justice presides for a sitting president, the top-ranking senator said. So it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who is no longer sitting, Trump, and he doesnt want to do it.
Roberts has not offered any comment on his role in a second impeachment trial since the House of Representatives voted in favor of taking the matter to trial in the Senate earlier this month.
That silence has been noted by those opposed to impeaching a former president.
Presiding officer Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts reads a question during the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump. Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts has not yet commented on his role in Donald Trumps second impeachment trial. AP Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has been vocal in his opposition to the second impeachment, used Roberts planned absence from the trial as a point in favor of dropping the trial.
The Constitution says two things about impeachment it is a tool to remove the officeholder, and it must be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Kentucky senator wrote in an op-ed Sunday for The Hill.
Neither one of those things will happen. President Trump is gone, and Justice John Roberts, properly noticing the absence of an officeholder being impeached, is declining to preside, he continued. That settles it for me.
Speaking earlier this week on the matter, Paul referenced Roberts again, saying, If the chief justice doesnt preside, I think its an illegitimate hearing and really goes to show that its not really constitutional to impeach someone whos not president.
Roberts role in the trial will be filled by Senate president pro tempore Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who voted to convict Trump during his first impeachment trial.
Leahy, the longest-serving Democrat in the Senate, pledged, however, to take his trial oath extraordinarily seriously.
When I preside over the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, I will not waver from my constitutional and sworn obligations to administer the trial with fairness, in accordance with the Constitution and the laws, he said in a statement when he revealed that he would sit in for Roberts.
Paul was not the only GOP senator to speak up over Roberts absence or comment on Leahy serving as his replacement.
Chief Justice John Roberts leads the US Supreme Court Justices as they arrive in the Crypt of the US Capitol for President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration. Chief Justice John Roberts leads the US Supreme Court justices as they arrive in the Crypt of the US Capitol for President-elect Joe Bidens inauguration. Jim Lo Scalzo/Pool Photo via AP Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of GOP leadership, remarked Monday, The Constitution requires that the chief justice preside over the impeachment trial of a president, but thats not what were doing. To me, thats indicative of the fact that were in uncharted waters.
I just think it looks very petty and vindictive, he added. I understand there are a lot of people who are mad, but the process itself already looks like a railroad job.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) echoed Cornyns concerns, saying, Theres only one constitutional process for impeachment and it is of the president, not a president. It requires the chief justice to preside.
Even Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) voiced objection to Roberts sitting out the trial last week amid concerns that he would do so.
That is his constitutional duty. I cant imagine why a Supreme Court justice would not do his duty, the liberal pol said.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which plays a critical role in the impeachment process, also hoped Roberts would attend.
I think he should because it will be a straightforward, simple trial. I would think that the chief justice lends the dignity and seriousness it requires, he said, noting that he was not required by law to do it.
#1: TommyTheMadArtist To: Ada (#0)
There is nothing real about who rules you, and there is nothing honest about their intentions. We know exactly who runs and rules this country and it is far past time to put an end to these lies and get rid of the corruption. Our government is corrupt to its core, and is a cancer on the nation. We must get rid of all of these traitors who have sat in office all this time enriching themselves and bleeding this country white of its prosperity and liberty.
TommyTheMadArtist posted on 2021-01-28 10:22:44 Reply Private Reply
#2: Lod To: TommyTheMadArtist (#1)
Lod posted on 2021-01-28 11:02:53 Reply Private Reply
#3: NeoconsNailed To: Ada (#0)
The spoilt children running things have an instant, e-z, law-free solution -- bop one of their own onto the bench in his place.
NeoconsNailed posted on 2021-01-28 11:26:31 Reply Private Reply
#4: Ada To: NeoconsNailed (#3)
Ada posted on 2021-01-28 13:24:54 Reply Private Reply
#5: James Deffenbach To: Ada (#0)
Blowhard Leahy is going to serve as a judge in a trial of a man he despises? That's feckin' rich, wonder if he has never heard that no man may be a judge in his own cause. That is a long standing and honored adage of common law. To allow a charlatan like Leahy sit in on judgment against Trump cannot be countenanced whether you like Trump or hate him.
James Deffenbach posted on 2021-01-29 01:47:30 Reply Private Reply
#6: NeoconsNailed To: James Deffenbach (#5)
en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts
NeoconsNailed posted on 2021-01-29 02:01:29 Reply Private Reply
#7: BTP Holdings To: Ada (#0)
I think Roberts has a point.
Impeachment is a tool for removing someone from office.
When Nixon realized he was going to be impeached over Watergate, he resigned first in order to keep his retirement pay.
Impeaching someone after he has left office seems like putting the cart before the horse. ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2021-01-29 07:53:10 Reply Private Reply