The House Is Derelict In Its Duties - Granite Grok

The House Is Derelict In Its Duties

The House Is Derelict In Its Duties

The House is derelict in its duties. The things done in the House violate the constitution of the United States. The House made a mockery of Due Process. The House says the “courts” do not have a role in impeachment. They are wrong.

There are two caveats to that. First, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides at the Senate trial. Second, the courts rule on disputes between the legislative and executive branches. The courts are essentially uninvolved in the day to day functioning. But they have important impeachment involvement.

Executive privilege:

Why does that matter in impeachment? It matters because it is based in the Constitution of the United States. Of executive privilege Adam Schiff wrote in 2012, “The White House assertion of privilege is backed by decades of precedent that has recognized the need for the president and his senior advisors to receive candid advice and information from their top aids.” That is correct. It is correct not because Adam Schiff said it, but because the constitution requires it.

So, to say that the courts have no role is wrong. Why did the House rush to impeachment? The House could not to not wait for a decision from a court? They had issues and went to court on the issue of executive privilege. They voluntarily withdrew their case.

It isn’t as if executive privilege hasn’t been utilized by presidents of both parties since our founding. This is not some new concept. We do not wave executive privilege. There is a reason we keep executive privilege and assert it when necessary. We keep privilege to protect the constitution and the separation of powers.

When a balance of powers question occurs the courts are essential

The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for complete judicial review. Speaker Pelosi clearly expressed her impatience and contempt for judicial proceedings. She said. “We cannot be at the mercy of the courts.”

Does that mean we take Article III of the constitution and remove it? Are we really acting like the courts are an improper venue to determine constitutional issues of this magnitude? That is why we have courts. That is the purpose of the federal judiciary.

The House is completely out of line arguing that the Senate has a responsibility to call more witnesses. They are out of line because it is the responsibility of the House to bring the case, complete and intact. The House investigates and votes impeachment. The Senate hears the case the House brings. That means the House prosecutes their case while the President defends.

Conclusion

Guess what? The judge of the case does not build the case, does not investigate the case, does not prosecute the case, and does not defend the case. The Senate, as the judge in this case hears the case presented to it. That is its responsibility in this case.

As entertaining as it might be to tie up the Senate until July doing the job of the House it would be wrong. Though it would benefit the Republican Party by keeping the opposition presidential candidates off the campaign trail, it would be wrong. The House is derelict in its duties. That does not mean it is right to take advantage… or does it?