Trump's threat to go to court over impeachment defies ruling

[Eugene]

Source: Associated Press

Trump’s threat to go to court over impeachment defies ruling

April 24, 2019

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Wednesday he’ll go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court “if the partisan Dems” ever try to impeach him.

But Trump’s strategy could run into a roadblock: the high court itself, which said in 1993 that the framers of the U.S. Constitution didn’t intend for the courts to have the power to review impeachment proceedings. The Supreme Court ruled that impeachment and removal from office is Congress’ duty alone.

“I DID NOTHING WRONG,” Trump tweeted. He said not only are there no “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” one of the bases for impeachment outlined in the Constitution, “there are no Crimes by me at all.”

-snip-

Trump’s threat to “head to the U.S. Supreme Court” would seem to face an uphill battle. In his 1993 opinion, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that a federal judge’s appeal of his impeachment was not reviewable by courts. He said the framers of the Constitution “did not intend for the courts to have the power to review impeachment proceedings.”

-snip-

Read more: https://apnews.com/776978c0f18c43d09da644c320bf0658

[honest.abe]

1. I suspect that would not end well for The Idiot.

In fact this would be yet another good reason to start the impeachment process. The spectacle of a SCOTUS ruling against Trump would be a huge setback for his reelection.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. Reelection? Could be like 1974 SCotUS ruling on tapes. Two weeks later Nixon resigned. . . . nt

[The Genealogist]

2. Wonder what would happen

Considering how much things have chsnged in this country over the past couple of years, I'm guessing his buddies over there would decide in his favor, and it would probably fall to Roberts to decide what side of history he wants to be on.

[honest.abe]

5. Yes, Roberts would be the swing vote.

I would bet a boatload of Big Macs that Roberts votes against Trump.

[onenote]

6. Thomas and Scalia joined with Rehnquist in the unanimous decision

finding that the courts have no jurisdiction to review impeachment matters.

It won't be close if Trump can convince his lawyers to pursue such a course of action (which, of course, presumes impeachment is actually put in play by Congress).

[deurbano]

13. But since shameless hypocrisy is their life's blood... and shredding every norm and precedent has

become the new "norm" (and precedent)... at a time when Republicans put party well before country, faith, morality, family (etc.)... can we really count on any consistency, if lack of consistency benefits the party?

[Maru Kitteh]

3. Somebody should make a custom copy of the Constitution and fill it with pictures of Trump and

the words "Donald John Trump" so maybe they could get him to read a little bit of it.

Or put on a made for TV movie showing a dramatic interpretation of the document with all the parts played by "young" Donald Trump impersonators.

[Wounded Bear]

4. His entire career is based on exploiting the courts for personal gain...

It's what he does. Given the court packing going on lately, I'm actually a bit scared by this.

Repub/Conserv judges have been known to ignore and overturn precedent before.

[leftieNanner]

7. I have the same foreboding, Bear

Rachel has insisted that the law is on our side. Perhaps it once was, but I don't have the confidence that she does.

[shanti]

17. Exactly, it's his MO

He wants EVERYTHING to be snarled up in court....to the bitter end.

[ancianita]

8. There won't be any "swing" anything, because SCOTUS can't rule on Congressional impeachment.

[ancianita]

9. From Quora: No Worries because...

Impeachment is a purely political matter, one of the powers assigned solely to Congress. While the Chief Justice rules over impeachment proceedings of presidents, they are restricted to following the Senate rules and procedures in the handling of the trial, and can’t overrule those rules and procedures.

Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution has the clause…

“The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”

Article 1, Section 3 has the clause…

“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.”

Note the word “sole”. Meaning SCOTUS cannot overturn. Impeachment is one of the checks and balance powers granted solely to Congress.

And SCOTUS has ruled on the issue before, saying they can’t make rulings against any impeachment process as long as the Senate followed their rules, but I can’t remember the case at the moment.

[gratuitous]

10. Well, Justice Boof has some peculiar notions on what is and is not settled law

Trump's put a lot of stock into the loyalty of the stooges he's put on the Supreme Court. Considering the general character of these low-lifes, I have to concede there is a non-zero chance that they will find some new and innovative reading of the Constitution that isn't constrained by the plain meaning of its words.

[ancianita]

20. Dershowitz has emerged as one who argues 45 can do it. I don't even want to read his thinking.

[honest.abe]

11. Unless Trump can argue the correct legal process was not followed.

Knowing how Trump and GOP play, they will try to come up with some obscure argument to force SCOTUS to take it up. He thinks he has enough votes in the SC but I seriously doubt it.

[ancianita]

19. They'll try but the court knows the legal process Roberts used and will refuse to hear the case.

The House will probably go through next year on impeachment to let the electoral process drive DJT out so that he can be indicted.

The laws that get passed after that will prevent another "businessman" from ever treating the country to suit his view of the Executive ever again.

I never want a non-lawyer president again. Even a JD will do. But never a businessman.

[safeinOhio]

12. Plan B.

Gonna fire me some SC Justices.

[Cold War Spook]

14. Even the conservatives on the court

won't be willing to disregard the actual wording in the Constitution.

[demigoddess]

15. He doth protest too much.

trying to convince us that he's innocent
trying to convince us we can't impeach him
trying to convince us that he would survive impeachment.
trying to convince us that the courts would overturn impeachment
trying to convince us.

[UTUSN]

18. What SHITER "defies" is the limits of his IGNORANCE!1