Impartial Justice #1

 As I have been watching the second trial of Donald J. Trump, I have been overwhelmed by the mass of arguments meticulously planned and well delivered by the House Managers. Yesterday the impactful video showing the real time juxtaposition of events on January 6th and then, the arguments concerning the constitutionality of the trial seemed to have the weight of truth behind them. It seemed to me that anyone who was listening would come to the conclusion that the January 6th insurrection was not only instigated by Trump, but also had precedent to be a constitutional trial. Trump's defense team gave an incoherent and disorganized defense of their stance that the trial was not constitutional. 

Then the vote came: 44 senators voted that the trial was not constitutional. Even though 56 Senators voted that it was, I could not believe that 44 voted against the overwhelming evidence presented by the Democratic Managers. How could this be?

Later, I was struck by what Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, who was the only GOP senator to change his vote on the constitutionality of former President Trump's impeachment said to explain his change of mind. “Now I’m an impartial juror, and one side is doing a great job and the other side is doing a terrible job on the issue at hand," Cassidy told reporters. “As an impartial juror, I’m going to vote for the side that did the good job.”

As I heard him say this, I thought about the words "impartial juror." Jurors at any trial are supposed to be impartial. In voir dire, they are questioned about beliefs and actions that might sway their opinion about the trial. Senators are not subjected to voir dire. That made me wonder about the oath that the Senators took when they were sworn in as jurors, so I looked it up.  Here it is:

FORM OF OATH TO BE ADMINISTERED TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE 

                ``I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that 

            in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment 

            of ------ ------, now pending, I will do impartial justice 

            according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.''


To take this oath establishes that each senator is answerable for his vote, not to his constituents or his party, but to the law, the Constitution, and to God.


And yet, it is continuously reported that there is no chance that Trump will be convicted. This is before the evidence has even been presented. Shades of Judge Roy Bean - You'll get a fair trial followed by a first class hanging.


Additionally, I hear from the TV moderators that Senators are "becoming restless." One has his feet up on a chair. Several are not watching the video that is presented as evidence. We have elected these people to make decisions for us, yet some of them can't even pay attention while evidence is presented? 


In my previous career as a speech and theatre teacher, I judged debate. As a judge, I had to follow the arguments in order to see which side was winning the debate. When one side presents a logical, well organized and researched argument and the other side does not, it become quite easy to know who has won. Yet 44 Senators voted against the constitutionality of the trial.


In Trump's previous impeachment trial, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has made his position clear. "I'm not an impartial juror. This is a political process. There's not anything judicial about it," the Kentucky Republican told reporters in December. "I would anticipate we will have a largely partisan outcome in the Senate. I'm not impartial about this at all." 


Why do we even ask that the Senate take an oath that demands impartial justice when both sides have already decided the case?





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Character House

  When I was a child, I found a book my mother had bought through a book club. It was called Little Britches . The story was narrated by a boy about nine years old, and I was close to that age, so I read it with interest. The author Ralph Moody wrote about his relationship with his father growing up on a ranch in Colorado . He went on to write several more books about his coming of age in the early 20 th century, and I have them all. I read them aloud to my children when they were growing up, and every now and then, I revisit them.   The first book recounted an episode when Ralph lied to his father about something he wanted. The father punished him, but he also told him a story which resonates with me even today. He told Ralph that a man’s character is like his house. When a man lies to get what he wants, it’s like tearing the boards off his house and burning them to keep himself warm. Eventually he will have destroyed his house for selfish reasons, and a man with a ruine...
Read more

Impartial Justice #2

  We hear daily that there’s no chance the Republicans will vote to convict Trump for inciting insurrection on January 6 th .   After January 6 th ; however, many Republican Senators had a different story: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) “The mob was fed lies,” McConnell said on the Senate floor nearly two weeks after Jan. 6. “They were provoked by the president and other powerful people. And they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) “The call to march down the Capitol — it was inciting,” Cramer said. “It was pouring fuel on a spark.” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) “I think it was a tragic day, and he was part of it.” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) “Certainly encouraging people to go to the Capitol and some of the sort of                implied suggestions I think are, you know … they just encourage th...
Read more