1/ This @nytopinion claim that chief justice can unilaterally issue subpoena for witnesses seems a weak reading of impeachment rules. Authors overlook critical rule (#VI) that states "The Senate shall have power to compel the attendance of witnesses..."
nytimes.com/2020/01/27/opi…
nytimes.com/2020/01/27/opi…
@nytopinion 2/ Granted, Senate impeachment rules can be ambiguous if you line up all the rules that touch on orders, writs, witnesses, etc. But ambiguity is often baked into Senate rules. They don't foresee every application, and Sen majority is ultimate interpreter of meaning of its rules.
@nytopinion 3/ The presiding officer (here, the chief justice) isn't endowed with great parliamentary powers during impeachment trials. The role is to execute decisions of the Senate. And-- as with the Senate generally-- a Senate majority is the ultimate arbiter of procedural questions.
@nytopinion 4/ Senators can of course *try* the tactic proposed in the op-ed. But ultimately, the power of Democrats to succeed in calling witnesses is *likely* to depend on securing GOP votes for their procedural gambit.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
