Should one of the most important of all trials allow a biased jury to be seated? A Facebook friend posts, saying the Democratic presidential candidates running against President Trump should not be allowed. Comes the reply from her readers: What of Mitch McConnell, he who has even pledged to not to be impartial?
One of her readers says, "Sorry Angie, but the Constitution states that the jury in a trial like this is made up of US Senators, regardless of whether they are running for President or not. . . . What the Constitution says is what it says."
He makes a good point. The Constitution says trying the impeachment shall be the sole power of the Senate. It does not, however, specify whether all senators shall qualify to vote (although we can see how this might be assumed). Did they have political parties back when the Constitution was written? The bias and partiality might not have been foreseen.
Having an impartial jury is important. Probably every other trial setting in America strives to seat an impartial jury. Why should we abandon that principle of justice here? Could the Senate set its own rules for who can participate? The Constitution gives it power to try the impeachment, but if it is the Senate, itself, limiting the jury, that would still be within the Constitution, wouldn't it? Or, could the chief justice rule on who is impartial? The Constitution says he will preside over the trial. In trials all across America, do not the judges ensure that impartial juries are seated?
No comments:
Post a Comment