General Discussion

TomSlick

(11,096 posts)

10. I understand the argument. The problem is there is no precedent - either way.

Mon Jan 25, 2021, 09:54 PM

Jan 2021

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution provides: "When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside...." When Trump was impeached (by the House), he was the President. The Senate trial is a continuation of that process.

If CJ Roberts was not offered the job, it bolsters arguments that the Senate trial is improper.

I see no reason that the CJ should not be offered the opportunity to preside. If he declines (as I think he should), then the Senate should proceed with the pro temp in the chair.

As a believer in the belt-and-suspender practice of law, I would prefer to avoid this issue by inviting CJ Roberts the opportunity to preside and hope he declines.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I am concerned about CJ Roberts not presiding over the impeachment trial. [View all] TomSlick Jan 2021 OP

Precedent. No Excutive Official impeached after leaving office has had a Chief Justice officiate. hlthe2b Jan 2021 #1

Except in three previous impeachments, no Chief Justice presided over ANY impeachment trial StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #4

I just said that. hlthe2b Jan 2021 #6

No, that's NOT what you said StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #9

The two are mutually exclusive. If you only think through. hlthe2b Jan 2021 #14

So, I didn't repeat what you said, after all StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #25

Do you expectdump to be subpoenad to testify? SheltieLover Jan 2021 #7

Yes. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #11

Oh, Karma... SheltieLover Jan 2021 #15

Can they lock him up for refusing? SheltieLover Jan 2021 #16

No. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #19

Goddammit! SheltieLover Jan 2021 #23

That's not the reason StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #26

Ty! SheltieLover Jan 2021 #27

No. Essentially, he's a coward. Laelth Jan 2021 #21

Let's hope his need for attention takes over SheltieLover Jan 2021 #24

Chief Justice only presides over the impeachment trial of the president EarlG Jan 2021 #2

I understand the argument. The problem is there is no precedent - either way. TomSlick Jan 2021 #10

Schumer just said the Senate asked Roberts to preside and he declined. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #28

The Chief Justice is required to preside if it's the president being tried StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #31

Fair enough EarlG Jan 2021 #36

I have no concerns. It is 100% the correct decision. I hope the Senate didn't ask him. servermsh Jan 2021 #3

See post 10 above. TomSlick Jan 2021 #13

The Chief Justice is required to preside over the impeachment trial of a sitting president StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #33

I'm not- Leahy is less likely to put up with GOP shenanigans. Nt Fiendish Thingy Jan 2021 #5

Under the Senate rules the Chief Justice presides only over trials of presidents. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2021 #8

See post 10 above. TomSlick Jan 2021 #12

"When the President of the United States is *tried* the Chief Justice shall preside...." The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2021 #18

That's a good point. TomSlick Jan 2021 #20

Federalist Papers 65 and 66 (both by Hamilton) deal with impeachment. TomSlick Jan 2021 #34

What matters is what the Constitution says, not what Hamilton was thinking. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2021 #35

Sure. But SCOTUS often looks to the Federalist Papers in parsing the Constitution. TomSlick Jan 2021 #37

But if he was impeached while President... Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2021 #22

That's not what the constitution says. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2021 #29

"I am uncertain of that argument." - I'm pretty certain Trump isn't President. n/t PoliticAverse Jan 2021 #17

Schumer just told Rachel Maddow that Roberts did not want to preside. nt spooky3 Jan 2021 #30

I saw that and it helps. TomSlick Jan 2021 #32