I think a lot of people misunderstand the Impeachment Trial process...

[brooklynite]

I keep reading questions about whether Justice Roberts can "overrule" McConnell over witnesses or other Democratic motions. The answer is "absolutely not".

Judges don't decide the legal rules of a trial. They decide whether the rules are being adhered to. In the case of criminal and civil courts, there are agreed upon rules of procedure that a Judge makes rulings based upon. In the case of an Impeachment Trial, the rules are...whatever a Majority of the Senate decide they are. If the McConnell and the Republicans choose to say that witnesses aren't needed, Justice Roberts has no ability to change that decision.

[onenote]

1. +1

[Mike 03]

2. Great post.

Thanks for the clarity.

[beachbumbob]

3. Roberts asked the senators to "solemnly swear" to "do impartial justice according to the

Constitution and laws." The senators said "I do" together, and the clerk called senators up to sign the impeachment oath in groups of four.

So here it is, senators took a sworn duty oath for "impartial justice", to me this opens the door to challenge every GOP senator who has made statements concerning not hearing evidence, not calling witnesses and voting for acquittal.

I believe this COULD fall directly to Roberts and circumventing McConnels "rules"

[tritsofme]

4. You repeat the mistake OP warned about...

Senators decide the rules of trial, Roberts simply cannot impose his will on a reluctant majority, full stop.

[beachbumbob]

7. I see an argument can be made that senators have violated the oath they swore.

the basis would be the oath, not McConnels rules

[tritsofme]

10. Again though...Roberts has no power to make unilateral and final determinations.

Any ruling, (and he would never in a million years make the ones you are suggesting) is still subject to a vote in the Senate.

[brooklynite]

5. Sorry, you're wrong.

In an actual court case, the prosecution can't introduce any evidence it wants to. Rules of evidence have been agreed to beforehand.

[Pacifist Patriot]

8. He's mistaken, but additionally, this is not a court of law.

The rules of evidence we're used to in a civil or criminal trial do not apply whatsoever.

[question everything]

9. Not anymore

The Constitution does say that (Chief Justice) should preside. And then the Senate has a set of rules, most recently revised in 1986, which says that he could make determinations on questions of witnesses and evidence, but a majority of the Senate would overrule him, if it so desired.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212878997

[Pacifist Patriot]

6. WaPo has two good opinion pieces...

I linked to both of them in this post. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212888793

As a rarely used clause in the US Constitution, it's not surprising so many people don't understand how it is supposed to work. Gerhardt's piece, "What impeachment watchers are getting wrong about John Roberts’s role" does a great job of clearly explaining the misconceptions you're addressing.

[kentuck]

11. Can they ask to amend the rules?

To ask that witnesses be permitted before the opening arguments?

And force Republicans to vote against witnesses before openings?

[brooklynite]

12. Yes; and when Republicans vote "no", they have no appeal.

[kentuck]

13. Is that good or bad for Democrats?

Politically?

Would that be a wise vote for Republicans?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

14. Article I, Sections 3 and 5

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei

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.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.

Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.

Moscow Mitch and the Russiapublicans could make a rule that the "Chief Justice shall preside" from the broom closet.