Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The reality is that Roberts isn't going to overstep, he's just going to ensure the rules the Senate create are abided by and there will be no drama on that front for several reasons.
And the rules that the Senate approves are likely to closely mirror those used for President Clinton's impeachment trial, which included the full possible array of constitutional rights and protections for the defendant in a trial for "High crimes and misdemeanors".
President Trump will be the recipient of these same rights and protections.
The reality is that Roberts isn't going to overstep, he's just going to ensure the rules the Senate create are abided by and there will be no drama on that front for several reasons.
Roberts is there to oversee trial rules established by the Senate, in this case the GOP Senate majority. He isn't free to do what he wills. And, unlike a leftist justice/judge, he won't be itching to do the opposite of what I wrote.
But he is also there to settle disputes not covered by the rules, which for sure will come up. The rule making ability of the Senate is also a gray area - can they write down any rule they want? For instance they could create a rule that the trial will be held in 2025, which would be after Trump's last term (if reelected). Can rules be appealed to Roberts, just as they are to a trial judge? I believe he is the one to answer that.
...But if this starts going off of the rails, as this entire process has been since its inception, then Roberts will surely move to get it back on again.
The Democrats are in the minority, remember? If it goes off the rails it'll be because McConnell is driving the train too hard.
But he is also there to settle disputes not covered by the rules, which for sure will come up. The rule making ability of the Senate is also a gray area - can they write down any rule they want? For instance they could create a rule that the trial will be held in 2025, which would be after Trump's last term (if reelected). Can rules be appealed to Roberts, just as they are to a trial judge? I believe he is the one to answer that.
They can do pretty much whatever they want. They answer only to the voters. And there are no appeals.
The most interesting part of the Senate trial is seeing what Roberts does.
-- What will Roberts let McConnell get away with?
-- Will Roberts ask totally partisan Senators who have stated how they will vote publicly (looking at you Lindsay Graham) to recuse themselves? Senators will take an oath to be impartial jurors. You can't be one if you've already announced how you will vote and won't listen to evidence.
-- Will Roberts enforce House subpoenas or issue subpoenas himself? I can see where Roberts would take particular exception to people like Pompeo, Mulvaney and McGahn ignoring Congressional subpoenas because it is blatantly unconstitutional.
-- If the R senators want the whistleblower and/or Biden to appear, what will Roberts do?
Roberts is not a Trump follower by any means but he doesn't seem to have a strong hand either. We'll see if he lays down some rules or if he just shrinks from view and let McConnell drive it all.
It won't be up to Roberts. 51% of the Senators will have to agree on who is called and who is not. Senators can call witnesses themselves - but they have to get the buy in.
But he is also there to settle disputes not covered by the rules, which for sure will come up. The rule making ability of the Senate is also a gray area - can they write down any rule they want? For instance they could create a rule that the trial will be held in 2025, which would be after Trump's last term (if reelected). Can rules be appealed to Roberts, just as they are to a trial judge? I believe he is the one to answer that.
He would have no authority to overrule any rule the Senate majority set. If a ridiculous rule like that were to be set, it would cause a constitutional crisis.... if they wanted no trial all they'd have to do is vote to dismiss the articles immediately after they were read for the first time.
I think people are going to be disappointed with how this plays out....it's gunna fizzle.
It's going to fizzle because Graham and McConnell do NOT want to call any witnesses. They have made it quite clear that they want this to go as fast as possible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
