Constitutional law experts rain hell on Trump for threatening to challenge impeachment in Supreme Court

Supreme Court

President Donald Trump declared on Wednesday morning that he would challenge impeachment in the Supreme Court, causing constitutional law experts to laugh at him.

As more and more Democrats and prominent conservatives call for impeachment, Trump lashed out by threatening to appeal any such effort to the Supreme Court.

Claim Your Free Gift!

Free Dump Trump Toilet Paper

As a Thank You to our readers we're giving away a Free Gift this Holiday season!

Gift in partnership with blueisbest.net

The problem is that the Constitution clearly says that the House of Representatives has the sole power to impeach while the Senate is responsible for holding the impeachment trial and carrying out a vote on whether or not the president is guilty and should be ousted from office. The only involvement from the Supreme Court is that the Chief Justice presides over the trial. The high court itself cannot do anything to block an impeachment.

In response to Trump’s ignorance of the Constitution and the powers of the three branches, constitutional law experts schooled him.

Georgetown Law professor Joshua Matz explained how impeachment works.

Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe slammed Trump’s “idiocy” and accused him of believing he has stacked the high court in his favor enough to get away with anything.

Even Neal Katyal informed Trump that his threat is ridiculous and directly quoted the Constitution.

Matz and Tribe further countered Trump by posting an excerpt from their book on their blog about impeachment and the Supreme Court.

One of the most significant objections to trying impeachments before the Supreme Court was that the president might have appointed one or more of the justices. George Mason and Roger Sherman both raised this concern. At bottom, they worried about independence: the entity charged with trying the president should not be populated by his appointees and thereby subject to his influence. In that circumstance, an appearance (and reality) of bias could undermine the whole process—especially if the president had nominated allies who shared his corrupt or abusive views.

And with so few members on the court, it would be much easier to sway them to rule in the president’s favor. So, the founding fathers left the role of impeachment to Congress.

“With the Supreme Court disqualified, this left only one viable option in the federal government: the Senate,” the professors wrote.

The only thing Trump achieved with his tweet is demonstrate that he still has zero clue what the Constitution says and he believes he’s a dictator who can get away with breaking the law simply by stacking the courts in his favor. Unless the Supreme Court is prepared to spark a constitutional crisis by sticking its nose where it clearly doesn’t belong, the justices will laugh in Trump’s face if he dares try to get them involved.

Featured Image: Wikimedia