Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dershowitz: Supreme Court could overrule an unconstitutional impeachment
The Hill ^ | 05/31/19 04:08 PM EDT | Alan Dershowitz

Posted on 06/01/2019 1:57:41 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

Donald John TrumpOcasio-Cortez returns to bartending in support of tipped workers: 'Still got it!' Trade wars have cost stock market trillion: Deutsche Bank analysis Dollar stores warn they will have to raise prices over tariffs MORE has said that if the House were to impeach him despite his not having committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” he might seek review of such an unconstitutional action in the Supreme Court. On April 24, he tweeted that if “the partisan Dems ever tried to Impeach, I would first head to the U.S. Supreme Court. Not only are there no 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors,' there are no Crimes by me at all.”

Yesterday, when asked by a reporter if he thinks Congress will impeach him, the president responded, “I don’t see how. They can because they’re possibly allowed, although I can’t imagine the courts allowing it.”

Commentators have accused Trump of not understanding the way impeachment works and have stated quite categorically that the courts have no constitutional role to play in what is solely a congressional and political process. Time magazine declared in a headline “That’s Not How It Works,” and Vox called the president’s argument “profoundly confused.”

Scholars also echoed the derision. The influential legal blog Lawfare wrote confidently that “The Supreme Court Has No Role in Impeachment,” and my friend and colleague Larry Tribe, an eminent constitutional law scholar, called Trump’s argument simply “idiocy,” explaining that “the court is very good at slapping down attempts to drag things out by bringing it into a...”


(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alandershowitz; braking; dershowitz; donaldtrump; impeachment; impeachtrump; scotus; supremecourt; thedersh; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last
Doesn't matter. Distraction is the name of the game.
1 posted on 06/01/2019 1:57:41 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

TrumpOcasio-Cortez returns to bartending in support of tipped workers: ‘Still got it!’ Trade wars have cost stock market trillion: Deutsche Bank analysis Dollar stores warn they will have to raise prices over tariffs MORE


2 posted on 06/01/2019 1:59:08 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (This Space For Rant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Oh so judiciary has no role in clearly laid out powers of the constitution? Gee that’s novel.


3 posted on 06/01/2019 2:01:29 PM PDT by Bayard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“Whaa, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh sided with Trump because he nominated them! Garland would have impeached him!”


4 posted on 06/01/2019 2:02:34 PM PDT by Trump20162020
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bayard

He’s nuts to even suggest it


5 posted on 06/01/2019 2:03:51 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

The 2nd. Amendment over rules it too. These damn Democrats want another Civil War.


6 posted on 06/01/2019 2:05:29 PM PDT by jmacusa ("The more numerous the laws the more corrupt the government''.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

All these high end lawyers expressing an opinion in uncharted waters reminds me that there are too many with too much time on their hands. To think that they’re working in the public interest is a sham.


7 posted on 06/01/2019 2:13:21 PM PDT by DIRTYSECRET (urope. Why do they put up with this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“if “the partisan Dems ever tried to Impeach, I would first head to the U.S. Supreme Court. ””

I guess he could do that but I doubt the SC would take up the case. If they do impeach Trump there is nothing Trump can do to stop it or overturn it.


8 posted on 06/01/2019 2:30:04 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

There are less than 50 Rats who would vote for impeachment if it were brought to a floor vote despite the loudmouths who keep calling for it.


9 posted on 06/01/2019 2:31:21 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Where does it say in the Constitution anyone is entitled to the property another has labored for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
U.S. Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 4.

If they actually did that, the swamp would be rained overnight. The "impeachers" should be the ones being impeached.

BTW, this is an affirmative statement, mainly about removal. "Misdemeanors" is pretty wide open Not sure where Clinton's dalliances fall in. It may be that the Constitution is fairly loose about the required reasons for impeachment.

10 posted on 06/01/2019 2:33:51 PM PDT by Jim 0216 (MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

And the Justice Department should indict the Democrats involved for treason.


11 posted on 06/01/2019 2:39:22 PM PDT by kaehurowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
the courts have no constitutional role to play in what is solely a congressional and political process.

They have no constitutional role in promoting gay marriages either, but that didn't stop them.

12 posted on 06/01/2019 2:39:47 PM PDT by aimhigh (THIS is His commandment . . . . 1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Don’t look now, but Dershowitz is changing his tune. Starting to sound like one of the good guys.


13 posted on 06/01/2019 2:43:31 PM PDT by Jim 0216 (MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure,”

Jefferson wrote in a letter to William S. Smith, a diplomatic official in London, on November 13, 1787.Oct 17, 2009

14 posted on 06/01/2019 2:48:16 PM PDT by mosaicwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
Two former, well-respected justices of the Supreme Court first suggested that the judiciary may indeed have a role in reining in Congress were it to exceed its constitutional authority. Justice Byron White, a John F. Kennedy appointee, put it this way: “Finally, as applied to the special case of the President, the majority argument merely points out that, were the Senate to convict the President without any kind of trial, a Constitutional crisis might well result. It hardly follows that the Court ought to refrain from upholding the Constitution in all impeachment cases. Nor does it follow that, in cases of presidential impeachment, the Justices ought to abandon their constitutional responsibility because the Senate has precipitated a crisis.”

Justice David Souter, a George H. W. Bush appointee, echoed his predecessor: “If the Senate were to act in a manner seriously threatening the integrity of its results … judicial interference might well be appropriate.”

It is not too much of a stretch from the kind of constitutional crises imagined by these learned justices to a crisis caused by a Congress that impeached a president without evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The president is not above the law, but neither is Congress, whose members take an oath to support, not subvert, the Constitution. And that Constitution does not authorize impeachment for anything short of high crimes and misdemeanors.


15 posted on 06/01/2019 2:49:24 PM PDT by Bratch (IF YOU HAVE SELFISH IGNORANT CITIZENS, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE SELFISH IGNORANT LEADERS-George Carlin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216

“Starting to sound like one of the good guys.”

Dersh has been defending Trump during this coup since the beginning. He’s a Hillary-voting lib, but has been on our side since this began.


16 posted on 06/01/2019 2:54:56 PM PDT by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum; All

Bill Clinton showed that getting impeached by House is meaningless if Senate doesn’t officially agree with House’s findings.

So patriots have duty to elect as many new patriot senators as they cane in 2020 elections who will not only promise to support PDJT’s vision for MAGA, but will also promise to protect PDJT from Democratic-rigged impeachment.

Otherwise, if there wasn’t a possible threat of PDJT losing the support of an election-swinging number of low-information voters who can’t see past the stigma of a politically correct impeachment of Trump, I’d advise Trump to get impeached so that Democrats would have nothing to complain about in 2020 elections.

On the other hand, loser Democrats would probably drag out a mock impeachment of Trump, releasing new fake evidence to media the day before election day.

Corrections, insights welcome.


17 posted on 06/01/2019 3:07:21 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

“If they do impeach Trump there is nothing Trump can do to stop it or overturn it.”

Of course Trump can do something. Since we’re playing “what if this or that happens,” Trump can declare the house in insurrection and send in the Army Airborne to arrest them for sedition.


18 posted on 06/01/2019 3:09:55 PM PDT by sergeantdave (Teach a man to fish and he'll steal your gear and sell it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

I’m game.

The man, his supporters, and his family have been persecuted enough.


19 posted on 06/01/2019 3:11:24 PM PDT by combat_boots (God bless Israel and all who protect and defend her! Merry Christmas! In God We Trust!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Who presides over the trial in the Senate?


20 posted on 06/01/2019 3:13:46 PM PDT by Yo-Yo ( is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson