Chief Justice Roberts ready for the main role in a Trump impeachment

in the vicinity ofa video examining the role of Chief Justice John Roberts in a Senate impeachment trial

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, the unique role of the presidency in a Senate impeachment of the President, trombone; David Spunt reports would fill.

Only a few hours after house Democrats began to expect their impeachment inquiry in President Trump, Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to be, the partisan storm headed its way.

“If you live in a polarized political environment, people tend to put everything in terms of,” Roberts said in September. “That’s not how we claim to the court of justice function and the results in our cases, something else.”


Now, with a Senate trial of the President may be launching in the next month, depending on whether and, if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent the article – the man in the middle of the highest court, both ideologically as well as in a figurative sense, is ready to preside over criminal proceedings.


The unique assignment is determined by the Constitution. With Roberts at the helm, it would mark one of the few times that the highest levels of the three branches collide in a political struggle – one that the ripple can be maybe only weeks, but their effects for decades.

And in the face of simmering tensions between Trump and Roberts, the Supreme judge of the conduct in this role would be monitored closely, by both parties.

Sources say that Roberts will be ready with a calm Hand stretched out to employees in recent weeks about the role he would play in the management of the study. He can be sent to the Rehnquist model: as former Chief Justice William Rehnquist handled the 1999 impeachment trial of President Clinton.

“Chief Justice Rehnquist has to take a kind of solemnity to the occasion or a seriousness that was trying to kind of tamp down maybe on the policy and on the facts of the case,” said Robert Schaffer, was a Rehnquist law clerk during this momentous court term.

In spite of the vote, as a member of the high court a year earlier, so she can go to a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton to — the the subsequent charge process in motion-it was not a real objection with Rehnquist in the chair. The Paula Jones case led to Clinton tried on perjury and obstruction of justice, for his later statements under oath, where he denied having an affair with White House Intern Monica Lewinsky.


But as the Clinton process, the script of the trump-study can already be set before Roberts order ever gavels the spectacle.

Senate leaders-both Republicans and Democrats are working for the completion of the trial length, testimony, and exact role of the president ‘ s counsel. And the legislature — will have to establish would be the “jury”, in fact-who, by the exact rules of the negotiation, not the judge.

“[Rehnquist] was to allow the content to control the Senate, its own procedures,” said Schaffer. “And really, he considers himself a guest in the Senate during the impeachment proceedings.”

But that does not mean that Roberts be excluded would. Rehnquist issued important decisions on leadership senators on the impeachment process.

And he spoke from experience, writing in 1992, the book of the history of the 1868 impeachment of Andrew Johnson, “Grand Inquests.”

“The significance of the acquittal, [President Andrew Johnson] can hardly be overestimated,” Rehnquist, something Trump today approve. “With reference to the Chief Executive, it means that, as the policy he tried to follow he would be responsible only to the country as a whole in the quadrennial presidential elections, and not to the Congress, through the process of impeachment.”

When he was finished, Rehnquist described his role by a line of a favorite Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, “I did nothing special, and I did it very well.”

Roberts Rules

Now, Roberts, Rehnquist was once a law clerk, is his twist on the story.

A hybrid between a judicial procedure and legal debate, the Senate impeachment trials mix of ceremony and substance.

The chief justice of the United States be sworn in first, then the senators. His justice would carry robes for each public meeting, out of the seat, the normally only in the presiding officer. And he would be with the task of maintaining order with the chamber’s traditional handle-less ivory Hammer.

Roberts’ main role would be to make all the decisions in the proceedings is collected, the senators, the house impeachment Manager, or the President of the Council. But while he was able to decide on evidentiary questions or complaints that might choose the chief, the senators, instead of voting on these matters. Or the legislature could override the Roberts decisions with the majority of votes.

And since the senators are not allow to talk, all the questions you would be written according to the judge read aloud.

The chief of the most important power in breaking every Band votes. Chief justice Salmon P. Chase made two such votes during the Johnson-study.


Roberts also multi-tasking, the completion of a study at the same time with the care of his regular work load would be. The court is a counselor Jeffrey Minear would probably.of the head-side all the time, along with a rotating pair of law clerks


If in the capital, they will probably all work of the ceremonial presidents room, in the immediate vicinity of the Senate

“We will continue to do all the work of the court,” said Schaffer, of his experiences. “So there were times when we bring you were to read opinions on the the Senate for the chief justice to review and vote on.”

The face of justice

As the “face” of the third branch, Roberts, a stocky defenders of 870 active Federal has judge, that many of the public views them as “politicians in robes.”

The “boss”, as he is informally known around the court, has publicly stated his long-standing efforts to forge consensus with his colleagues, whenever possible, show respect for precedent and preservation of the court’s reputation.

“If we maintain a certain political decision, that remains the decision of the political branches and the fact that it can cause to the criticism of us is often a mistake,” he said in 2016. “We have the above or in addition to the criticism, because we, of course, unpopular decisions — very unpopular decisions.”

But Trump has more dull, with a result-oriented consistency in the assessment of the judge.

In particular, Roberts’ dramatic 2012 decides the voice of the defense, the key financing provision of the Affordable Care Act triggered conservative criticism that it was a calculated act of betrayal, a story Trump was too fight, eager to exploit on the election.


“Justice Roberts really let us down,” Trump said at a campaign event in December 2015. “What he has with ObamaCare is disgraceful, and I think he did, because he wanted to be popular inside the Beltway.”

In a rare public rebuke, Roberts responded a year ago, as a Trump blow criticized a legal return on his immigration policy, as well as the work of the “Obama address.”

The chief justice said: “We have no Obama, judges or to trump a judge, a Bush judge or a Clinton judge. What we have to do an extraordinary group of dedicated judges to do their best, and the same right to be in front of you.”

Roberts has voted with his liberal colleagues, to keep something of the policy of the President. And just a few weeks after each Senate trial, he would preside over oral arguments with respect to Trump’s refusal to turn over its banking and financial data in the face of subpoenas from the house committees and a state grand jury.

The public is still in the Supreme court in high esteem holds. A Fox News poll from early October found 68 percent of respondents have confidence in the institution, which is far greater than the President or the Congress. But just two years ago, confidence in the Supreme court, to 83 percent.

The chief justice has maintained for the most part, which is his steady, low-key leadership under both Republican and Democratic presidents, and the 64-year-old Roberts is unlikely to much care what is said about him personally. Term life on the bench gives him that security.


But he knows in order to take care of his — and the court’s reputation-during a hyper-partisan impeachment drama test his leadership qualities. Colleagues say he is fully prepared for the challenge.

“He has Schaffer has a history of being said to be a very independent, fair, almost referee-like justice, who calls them as he sees them”,. “I don’t think he’s going to treat, this study is different.”

Fox News’ David Spunt contributed to this report.

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular