SPONSORED:

Roberts under pressure from both sides in witness fight

Senate Democrats are pressing Chief Justice John Roberts to rule in favor of calling witnesses at President TrumpDonald John TrumpMore than 300 military family members endorse Biden Five takeaways from the final Trump-Biden debate Biden: 'I would transition from the oil industry' MORE's impeachment trial, while Republicans argue it could force his recusal from potential Supreme Court cases. 

Democrats say it's simple: A trial can’t be a fair one without witnesses. Republicans counter that if Roberts rules on witnesses, he will have to recuse himself from any Supreme Court case on Trump's claims of executive privilege over potential witnesses like former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonJohn Kelly called Trump 'the most flawed person' he's ever met: report Bolton: North Korea 'more dangerous now' Demand for Trump-related titles sparks expected record year for political books MORE and acting White House chief of staff Mick MulvaneyMick MulvaneyTrump says he may lower corporate tax rate to 20 percent if reelected Is Social Security safe from the courts? On The Money: House panel pulls Powell into partisan battles | New York considers hiking taxes on the rich | Treasury: Trump's payroll tax deferral won't hurt Social Security MORE.

“I don’t know how you have a serious trial unless you hear from witnesses who know in fact what the facts are, what happened,” said Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersBiden defends his health plan from Trump attacks Progressives blast Biden plan to form panel on Supreme Court reform Sanders: Progressives will work to 'rally the American people' if Biden wins MORE (I-Vt.), a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I think it would be appropriate for the chief justice to do what I think should be done, and that is to allow witnesses to testify,” he added.

While Roberts is expected to refer major disputes over trial procedures to the entire Senate for a vote, some Democrats hope he will make his own rulings on what they say are basic questions of fair jurisprudence.

Democrats argue that holding a trial but blocking the consideration of relevant witness testimony and document review would fall well short of what’s considered a fair trial in any court of law. 

“We’ve been working to get an agreement with Republicans about the relevant witnesses for the trial and relevant documents and we’re continuing that effort,” said Sen. Chris Van HollenChristopher (Chris) Van HollenDemocratic senators unveil bill to ban discrimination in financial services industry Senate Democrats call for ramped up Capitol coronavirus testing Democratic senators offer bill to make payroll tax deferral optional for federal workers MORE (D-Md.). “Those types of questions will have to be considered as the trial proceeds.” 

Senators who want Roberts to intervene have pointed to the precedent set by then-Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase in the 1868 impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson.

Chase broke two ties on procedural deadlocks, both votes on motions to adjourn.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Senate voted 27 to 21 to defeat an amendment proposed by Sen. Charles Sumner (R-Mass.) stating the chief justice had no authority to vote to break ties.

Senate Democratic Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerFive takeaways on Iran, Russia election interference Pelosi calls Iran 'bad actor' but not equivalent to Russia on election interference Schumer says briefing on Iranian election interference didn't convince him effort was meant to hurt Trump MORE (D-N.Y.) has focused his demands on four witnesses: Bolton, Mulvaney, senior White House adviser Robert Blair, and senior Office of Management and Budget official Michael Duffey.

Republicans are pushing back, arguing Trump is expected to assert executive privilege to block the four witnesses Democrats have requested.

“The chief justice is supposed to preside, not make decisions for the Senate,” said a senior Senate GOP aide. 

“It would be a conundrum for the chief justice,” the aide added. “Let’s say [Roberts] says, ‘I’m going to break the tie,’ and John Bolton has to testify. Wouldn’t he have to recuse himself when the Supreme Court gets the question as to whether executive privilege applies?”

The aide said it “would be an unprecedented interference of the third branch into the first branch.”

A second senior Senate Republican aide said “the chief justice doesn’t vote,” adding that “you need 51 votes” to decide trial procedures.

Sen. Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiRepublicans advance Barrett's Supreme Court nomination after Democrats boycott committee vote Democrats to boycott committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination Senate to vote Monday to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court MORE (R-Alaska) told The Hill she has received briefing materials from former senators who participated in the 1999 Clinton trial arguing Roberts should not be able to break a tie. 

So far, she is still thinking about what his role should be. 

“It’s my understanding that if it’s a tie, it fails,” she said, summarizing the briefing paper. 

The chief justice is expected to do everything possible to avoid politicizing his or her role through partisan rulings, but Roberts could also come under harsh criticism from Democrats if he takes no action and allows Republicans to proceed with their preferred format, which does not include witnesses.

When Roberts swore in senators at the start of the trial on Thursday, he asked them to “do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“Every Senate impeachment trial in our history, all 15 that were brought to completion, featured witnesses. Every single one,” Schumer said Thursday. “The precedent in impeachment trials in the Senate is to have witnesses. To have no witnesses would be a dramatic break with precedent.” 

Schumer is also seeking to subpoena three sets of documents. He wants memos and emails related to efforts to pressure Ukraine to announce certain political investigations; documents related to the decision at the White House to withhold a meeting with the newly elected Ukrainian president; and communication touching the decision to withhold $391 million in military assistance to Ukraine. 

So far, two Republican senators have said they will likely vote to call additional witnesses.

Sen. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyBipartisan group of senators call on Trump to sanction Russia over Navalny poisoning Mitt Romney did not vote for Trump in 2020 election Biden: Johnson should be 'ashamed' for suggesting family profited from their name MORE (R-Utah) told reporters, “I presume I’ll be voting in favor of hearing from John Bolton, perhaps among others.”

Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsRepublicans advance Barrett's Supreme Court nomination after Democrats boycott committee vote Democrats to boycott committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination Power players play chess match on COVID-19 aid MORE (R-Maine) issued a statement Thursday saying “it is likely that I would support a motion to call witnesses” after both sides present opening arguments.

A third Republican, Murkowski, said she is “curious” to hear what Bolton has to say but won’t reveal how she’ll vote on witness subpoenas.

ADVERTISEMENT

Finding a fourth GOP senator to vote for subpoenas would be a tougher task, raising the prospect of a Senate deadlock.

Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber.

Sen. Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinDemocrats to boycott committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination The Senate should evoke RBG in its confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by Goldman Sachs - Pelosi, Mnuchin push stimulus talks forward, McConnell applies brakes MORE (Calif.), the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said Roberts should break a 50-50 tie on a major procedural question, such as whether to subpoena Bolton or Mulvaney.

“It seems to me it should,” she said. “Tie vote is essentially a no on whatever the issue is. I’m not sure in this kind of situation that the body wants to sustain immobility, that you can’t move out of it. So something ought to break a tie.”

But Sen. Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyOn The Money: GOP cool to White House's .6T coronavirus price tag | Company layoffs mount as pandemic heads into fall | Initial jobless claims drop to 837,000 GOP cool to White House's .6T coronavirus price tag The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by Facebook - Republicans lawmakers rebuke Trump on election MORE (R-Ala.) said it would be odd for the chief justice to decide procedural questions that have become very politicized in recent weeks. 

“This is a Senate procedure,” he said. “In a committee, if you have a tie vote you don’t prevail. And that’s what would happen here, I would think.”

 

Correction: This article was updated Jan. 23 to reflect that Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase voted on two motions to adjourn the Senate. An amendment to prevent the chief justice from voting was soundly defeated without Chase’s participation.