Sen. Leahy, not Supreme Court chief justice, expected to preside over impeachment trial

[sabra]

Source: USA Today

House Democrats will carry today their article of impeachment against Donald Trump across the Capitol to the Senate. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the president pro tempore of the Senate, is expected to preside over the trial, which will start Feb. 9.

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/25/politics-live-updates-trump-impeachment-article-goes-senate/6698416002/

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/us/politics/patrick-leahy-trump-impeachment.html

Senator Patrick Leahy, the longest-serving Democrat, will preside over Trump’s impeachment trial.

Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Senate president pro tempore, is expected to preside over former President Donald J. Trump’s impeachment trial when it formally begins on Tuesday, assuming a role filled last year by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., aides and other officials said on Monday.

The Constitution states that the chief justice of the United States presides over any impeachment trial of the president or vice president. But it does not explicitly give guidance on who should oversee the proceeding for others, including former presidents, and it appeared that Chief Justice Roberts was uninterested in reprising a time consuming role that would insert him and the Supreme Court directly into the fractious political fight over Mr. Trump.

Mr. Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, recently reclaimed the mantle of president pro tempore — the position reserved for the longest-serving member of the majority party — when Democrats took control of the Senate. Mr. Leahy, 80, has been in office since 1974.

The role was largely ceremonial in the first impeachment trial of Mr. Trump a year ago. But as the presiding officer, Mr. Leahy could issue rulings on key questions around the admissibility of evidence and whether a trial of a former president is even allowed under the Constitution.

[Rhiannon12866]

1. K&R for Senator Leahy!

Good news!

[NurseJackie]

2. Here's the important bit that EXPLAINS the headline...

The Supreme Court’s chief justice presides over impeachment trials of a sitting president. However, the president of the Senate, who is the vice president or the president pro tempore in the vice president’s absence, presides over other impeachment trials.

[elleng]

3. 'now that Trump is a former president, Roberts is not constitutionally obligated to preside.'

Chief Justice John Roberts presided over President Trump's first impeachment trial, but now that Trump is a former president, Roberts is not constitutionally obligated to preside.

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/25/960389715/sen-patrick-leahy-to-preside-over-trumps-senate-impeachment-trial

[hauckeye]

4. Can Leahy still vote then?

[Nitram]

20. The NY Times article at the link explains that Leahy will be able to vote, and Harris can vote in

the event of a tie.

[DonaldsRump]

5. This is a masterstroke

Last edited Tue Jan 26, 2021, 09:35 AM - Edit history (2)

By not having CJ Roberts and a majority of Rs, evidence will very likely be admitted in this trial, unlike the last one.

Importantly, a majority of Americans favor impeachment AND conviction: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/majority-supports-trump-impeachment-462264 .

I doubt there is ANY exculpatory evidence that would help Trump. At best, his defenders are going to make arguments that he can't be convicted since he is no longer President or Alan Dershowitz's idiotic argument that Trump can't be convicted for exercising his First Amendment rights.

This will force Rs in the Senate and elsewhere to confess how they feel about Trump's sedition. If I were them, I wouldn't be too happy about this trial. And that makes ME very happy!

I confess that I was against Senator Leahy in this role when I first read about it an hour ago. But when I read the arguments that folks much wiser than me made on good 'ole DU (it is 20 years old now!), I have to say this is excellent. We would have had a much harder time with CJ Roberts as presiding officer.

[hedda_foil]

18. "WE'RE SORRY, BUT THAT PAGE CANNOT BE FOUND"

[BumRushDaShow]

24. Here's a working link

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/majority-supports-trump-impeachment-462264

(ETA - DonaldsRump's link had a period at the end which is why it didn't work )

[hedda_foil]

34. Thanks very much. I missed the period when I tried to figure out what went wrong.

[DonaldsRump]

42. Thanks for spotting this!

I've now fixed it in my post.

[BumRushDaShow]

43. You are welcome!!!

(I've done the same thing - accidentally getting a comma or period incorporated in the link tags )

[ffr]

6. Wow, so like ALL the evidence will be made open?

Instead of most of it off limits?

[mezame]

13. And Witnesses!

[ffr]

15. Witnesses too? Next you'll tell me the jury will be impartial.

Naaaa, that'll never happen. That only happens to the rest of us.

[mezame]

36. Yup...

...but remember, there is no "jury" - this is a Legislative trial, not a Judicial one.

[GeorgeGist]

8. John Roberts Jr. is a coward.

[Nitram]

22. I don't think this suggests he is a coward. He's handing it over to the Senate because it is

not the impeachment of a sitting president. I'm sure he has better things to do.

[DinahMoeHum]

25. Remember, Trump is now A president, not THE President.

So Roberts is NOT obliged to preside over this trial.

[TristanIsolde]

9. This might be unpopular: but I think we need to move on

There is just so much to do and little time to do it. Impeachment is a political exercise anyway, just hold an up/down vote in the senate and be done with it.

[NHvet]

10. Unfortunately

That approach would play into the other sides hands where they would scream that this a kangaroo court and Trump was denied his day in court. Lets lay out all the evidence, make the case off the facts and force them to counter with whatever stink they can and we'll see what sticks. Force them to stand with or against him, but we need to make sure the people can see the truth. We can't let emotions run the show. Slow and steady wins the race.

[cstanleytech]

12. Actually it's the best place to get everything out in the open for both sides assuming

the person presiding over it is honest.

[Upthevibe]

17. TristanIsolde....

Sorry....Nothing personal but I can't tell you how strongly I disagree with you....

[lastlib]

28. If we "just move on," to quote Ari Melber (quoting someone else)....

January 6th becomes a "training exercise" for the next fascist wannabe dictator.

[BumRushDaShow]

32. Um no

An insurrection in the Capitol of the U.S. is not something you just wave away. The events of January 6, 2021 and what lead up to that day, MUST be documented and recorded in the historic record and the perpetrators MUST be punished.

Not since the War of 1812 has someone come in and sacked the Capitol - and even in that case, it was the British doing it where now, it was our "own" American people. Even during the Civil War, no one did that.

(1814)




(1846)


(2021)


This cannot be allowed to stand and swept under the rug.

[DonaldsRump]

44. Great post and pics n/t

[manicdem]

38. I agree

The next elections is only 2 years away and odds are that Republicans take the senate or house. 2 years may seem like a lot, buts not when there's a lot of reversing previous damage and pushing for progressive reforms.

[cstanleytech]

11. I can understand freezing Roberts out given how he behaved with the first trial.

[usaf-vet]

14. Was Roberts there for the first impeachment? You could have fooled me.

[cstanleytech]

16. Exactly, his decision to completely shirk his obligation

is why he is being frozen out and I do not think history will reflect well on him for that.

[usaf-vet]

26. Especially considering the post impeachment 1 additional outrageous behavior Trump exhibited......

..... NOTHING was learned by being impeached, except maybe he could get away with anything, including commanding an insurrection.

[Nitram]

27. Roberts is not "being frozen out." He declined to accept the role.

[cstanleytech]

29. Regardless it's a good thing he won't be involved in this one.

[Polybius]

30. He was fairer than Rehnquist in 1998

I remember that disastrous Senate trial.

[Nitram]

40. I agree. He made the right decision.

[onetexan]

21. exactly, fine w/ me Sen. Leahy's taking his place

[TNNurse]

19. John Roberts should be removed for not doing his job.

[Polybius]

31. He doesn't have to go, because it's not against a sitting President

He was asked if he wanted to go, and he declined.

[TNNurse]

33. I think he should see it as the duty of his job.

It is a damn big deal.

[Nitram]

41. He did his job and decided a Democrat would be more effective in the role than he would.

I agree with him. I'm glad he stepped aside.

[FakeNoose]

23. What about VP Kamala Harris?

Will she attend the impeachment trial? Will she have a vote?
I don't want her to be frozen out of the proceedings, she's a great prosecutor.

[FBaggins]

35. She could have a vote in the event of a tie

But there can't be a "tie" on the conviction/acquittal vote. So she can't vote there.

[Calista241]

37. My opinion is that this is not a good look.

We have Dems presiding over the impeachment of a Repub. Judges are supposed to be impartial. It’s one of the key tenants of our legal system. Not only is the Leahy a member of Trump’s opposition (which by definition is not impartial), but he’s going to be a part of the jury as well.

I wonder if Trump will even attempt to put on a defense. His surrogates will just call it a banana republic move, similar to the arrest of the opposition in counties like Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, Uganda or Zimbabwe, and there’s not a whole lot of argument we’ll be able to make against it.

[Baclava]

39. Hanging Judge? after he's found guilty, throw him in Leavenworth and start The War Crimes Trial!