What if John Roberts refuses to go to the Senate trial?

[Polybius]

Since the Constitution mandates that he be there, what if he says no and doesn't show up? Does he get arrested by the Sergeant At Arms, US Martials, or someone else? Does the trial not start until he arrives?

There is no mention of a backup, but who would that be anyway? There are only two ranks on the Supreme Court, Chief Justice and Associate Justice. Perhaps longest serving member?

Edit: I know he won't refuse, what I'm asking is what happens if a Chief Justice were to refuse.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. He's not going to refuse.

[Polybius]

2. I know, but that wasn't the question

What would happen if a Chief Justice refused?

[onenote]

3. why do people insist on speculating on things that have no chance of happening?

[Polybius]

5. I'm just wondering about what would happen

I'm not talking about this case, so let's do a different scenario in the far future:

While John Roberts isn't a Trump hack, let's say President Smith is impeached in 2094, and the Senate has the votes to convict. Smith appointed the Chief Justice (Terry Grey) two years earlier, and Justice Grey refuses to go. What would happen by law? There is definitely a chance a Chief Justice could say no, especially if he or she is partisan and opposes the removal of the President.

[jberryhill]

6. Then he or she could be impeached for misconduct

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. He would be tied to a post in the public square and pelted with rotten fruit.

[elleng]

4. No rules.

[matt819]

8. SNL from decades ago

What if Eleanor Roosevelt could fly. I can’t recall If this was a regular bit or a one off, but the op made me think of it.

Speculating is okay as long as it’s in the realm of possibilities. What is McConnell calls no witnesses? What if some republicans are no shows?

[SCantiGOP]

9. What if Superman's capsule

had landed in Germany in the 1930’s?
Would he have adopted his Nazi parents’ values like he did in the US, and used his powers for the Fatherland?

(another SNL skit)

[Rstrstx]

10. Maybe the next in line would stand in?

This is as close as I could find. From the U.S. Code Title 28 Section 3:

Whenever the Chief Justice is unable to perform the duties of his office or the office is vacant, his powers and duties shall devolve upon the associate justice next in precedence who is able to act, until such disability is removed or another Chief Justice is appointed and duly qualified.

I would guess this statute would kick in if the Chief Justice refused or more likely recused.

[onenote]

11. One could fashion an argument that a court case could be brought to compel him to attend

While the SCOTUS held in the Nixon v. US case that the question of what procedures are consistent with the constitution's assignment of the task of trying impeachments to the Senate are nonjusticiable, the Court went out of its way (as did the concurring Justices) to contrast the vague meaning of "try" with the clear constitutional requirements that a guilty conviction require a 2/3 vote, that the trialbe conducted under oath or affirmation, and that the Chief Justice "shall" preside. There is no ambiguity and the courts likely would find that a case involving a declaration of a guilty verdict on less than 2/3 vote, or a trial held without administering any oath or affirmation to the Senate, or a refusal by the Chief Justice to comply with the mandatory directive in the Constitution are justiciable.