TRUMP’S LEGAL ARGUMENTS ARE CLEARLY WRONG


©Wendell Griffen, 2020
Little Rock, Arkansas
January 30, 2020

President Trump’s defense lawyers have asserted two clearly invalid legal arguments.  First, they argue that the Senate has the power to decide whether subpoenas should issue for compel witnesses to testify and compel federal agencies to produce documents pertaining to the articles of impeachment against Trump.  Then they argue that the Senate has the power to overrule legal decisions by Chief Justice John Roberts about discoverability of witness testimony and documentary evidence, Trump’s claim of absolute immunity, and executive privilege. 

Each argument presents a question of law, not fact.  Resolving them is the work of Chief Justice John Roberts as a matter of law.    None of the arguments are matters for Senators to decide under any circumstances.  The arguments involve the exercise of judicial power.  Senators cannot review and overrule decisions by the Chief Justice on legal questions in Trump’s impeachment trial because the Chief Justice is presiding judge for the trial. 

The United States Senate is the only forum for trial of the President of the United States on charges of impeachment.  In legal terms, the Senate has original and exclusive jurisdiction, which means the Senate is the first and final forum for all issues of law and fact pertaining to the impeachment. 

There is no appellate review of impeachment trial results.  There is no appellate review of legal rulings made by the Chief Justice during impeachment trials.  Original and exclusive jurisdiction means precisely that:  “original” and “exclusive” power for the Chief Justice to decide issues of law, and “original” and “exclusive” power for Senators to decide questions of fact during Trump’s impeachment trial.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is a lawyer.  McConnell knows that the Senate has original and exclusive jurisdiction for impeachment trials.  McConnell knows that the Chief Justice of the United States is the presiding judge for Trump’s impeachment pursuant to Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution. 

However, McConnell has brazenly distorted the legal issues in Trump’s impeachment so they appear as political issues requiring votes by Senators.  That is why Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer objected so strenuously to the resolution McConnell pushed through at the start of the Senate proceedings that called for Senators to vote on whether to call witnesses and receive documentary evidence after the parties made opening statements.    

Trial judges decide whether subpoenas should issue to compel witness testimony and production of documents.  Jurors never make those decisions.  Once a trial judge rules that subpoenas should issue to compel witness testimony and production of documents, jurors are never empowered to overrule trial judge decisions on those questions.

Trial judges decide whether claims of immunity are valid.  That is never a matter for jurors to decide.

Trial judges decide whether claims of privilege have been asserted, whether assertions of privilege are valid, and (if so) whether privilege has been waived.  Those rulings by trial judges are not appealed to jurors under any circumstances. 

House Managers should, therefore, urge Chief Justice Roberts to rule on the questions of law surrounding subpoenas for witness testimony and production of documentary evidence.  They should point to Article 1, Section 6 and remind everyone that Chief Justice Roberts has been empowered by the Constitution to decide the questions of law in Trump’s impeachment trial, and that his rulings are final. 

The role of Senators is to decide whether the factual evidence presented during Trump’s trial proves that he abused presidential power and obstructed Congress.  Senators aren’t authorized to decide issues of law. Chief Justice Roberts isn’t authorized to decide issues of fact.  The two roles (presiding judge and triers of fact) are distinct and never overlap. 

Trump’s legal arguments are wrong.  It’s time for Chief Justice Roberts – as presiding judge – to say so. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE LAMENTABLE AND INEVITABLE ISRAELI-HAMAS WAR

  ©Wendell Griffen, 2023   Mark Wingfield of Baptist News Global has written an analysis of the current war between Israel and Hamas. I am quoted in it along with others who hold shared and different perspectives.  https://baptistnews.com/article/in-this-war-there-are-no-good-guys/ The analogy Ashlee Wiest-Laird shared in Wingfield’s piece is appropriate. Nobody should expect people whose land has been stolen, who've been locked in a room of their house, denied basic protections and civil rights, attacked at will by a stronger, US financed, stocked, and cheered military that is the fourth largest in the world, and whose 75-year plea for justice has been belittled, to decide that fighting their way out of the hellish place they have been forced into is unreasonable.  I wrote a long piece for Baptist News Global in May of this year to mark the 75th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba (meaning "catastrophe") that provides the historical context for the war now bei
Read more

THE CRUEL DISMANTLING OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION (DEI) AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS

  THE CRUEL DISMANTLING OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION (DEI) AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS © Wendell Griffen, 2023   In an email message sent on Tuesday, June 13, Dr. Charles Robinson (Chancellor at the University of Arkansas flagship campus in Fayetteville, Arkansas) announced that staff and resources from the campus Division of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) would be reallocated to other campus offices beginning this fall. I’m posting a link to the message Chancellor Robinson sent the campus so you can read his words. https://chancellor.uark.edu/key-communications/150-forward-update-from-chancellor-robinson.php Robinson sent his message two weeks before the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided, by a 6-3 vote, that the admission policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC) are racially discriminatory because both schools include racial identity among the factors considered in determining who to admit. The SCOTUS decis
Read more

IT’S TIME TO VOTE AS FREE PEOPLE

  ©Wendell Griffen, 2024 Early voting for the Arkansas primary elections begins February 20 across Arkansas, and March 5 is Election Day.   So, candidates are working hard to attract attention and influence voting decisions by voters. This essay is my effort to inform voters in Arkansas about election contests involving candidates for positions on the Arkansas Supreme Court, Arkansas Court of Appeals, circuit courts, and district judges. Because judicial candidates are the least well known of all political office contenders those of us who understand what judges do must help voters decide whether to support certain candidates over others. I have been a licensed attorney in Arkansas since 1979. I am also a retired state court judge who served on the Arkansas Court of Appeals (from 1996 through 2008) and as a Circuit Judge (from 2011 through 2022). I taught law   at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Bowen School of Law from 2009 through 2011. I share this information so rea
Read more