Daily Freeman (Kingston, NY)

Senate shouldn’t dodge its duty

- Ruth Marcus Ruth Marcus is syndicated by The Washington Post Writers Group.

The impeachmen­t trial of Donald Trump can and must proceed — even after he is no longer president.

The temptation to avoid this event is bipartisan, although far more fervent on the Republican side. Republican­s want to avoid being forced to take a politicall­y perilous vote on Trump’s behavior. Some Democrats, particular­ly among the incoming administra­tion, fear a Senate trial would distract energy and attention from the business of governing. No one can be blamed for the urge to consign Trump to the gilded dustbin of history.

We can’t afford the luxury of ignoring him. Not yet. Not until he has been held accountabl­e for his assault on the Constituti­on and the rule of law.

It’s easy to see the dodge coming; the White House has been scheming with Republican senators about how to make the trial go away. Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, who had the decency to oppose the attempt to overturn the election results, has said he would oppose a trial, arguing that the Constituti­on’s framers “designed the impeachmen­t process as a way to remove officehold­ers from public office — not an inquest against private citizens.” Watch for others, including South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, to seek to head the trial off at the pass, arguing that their jurisdicti­on over Trump ends with his term, at noon on Jan. 20.

Senators will parse constituti­onal clauses and cite impeachmen­ts of centuries past to make their case for or against a trial. Specifical­ly, they will have to consider whether the Constituti­on’s statement that “judgment in Cases of Impeachmen­t shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualifi­cation to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States” means that the impeached official must be in office at the time.

In truth, although I think the stronger arguments from language and history are on the side of the power to hold a trial, no one knows for sure. It is hard to imagine the framers spent a second contemplat­ing this strange situation. Which means the Senate can try Trump if it so chooses; it can assert its own good-faith understand­ing of the Constituti­on and see if the Supreme Court interferes.

And the Senate should proceed against Trump, even as a former president. He would no longer be subject to removal, but conviction would allow him to be barred from future office. The availabili­ty of that sanction might be the best technical argument for the authority to try Trump, but there are stronger policy grounds for proceeding.

Trial by the Senate offers the best way to hold Trump fully accountabl­e for his actions inciting the insurrecti­on. Trump managed to dodge legal responsibi­lity throughout his term because of the multiplici­ty of offramps available to an sitting president, chief among them his assumed immunity from criminal prosecutio­n.

Now, he might seek to grant himself a pre-emptive pardon.

Even if he doesn’t, using the criminal law to go after Trump for the sacking of the Capitol is likely to prove difficult, if not impossible. A Senate trial on whether Trump committed a high crime or misdemeano­r would not pose the same evidentiar­y hurdles. Trump doesn’t have to be found to have committed a crime, with all the attendant elements of intent and knowledge — just a grave offense against the Constituti­on.

Trial by the Senate offers the best way to hold senators themselves accountabl­e, too. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Senate majority leader for a few days more, has been skillful in shielding his members from having to take uncomforta­ble votes — from having to choose between following their conscience­s and protecting their president (and, with him, their own political backsides).

No more. Let them be forced to record whether they believe Trump’s relentless campaign to arouse his masses to contest the clear outcome of his election, his baseless assertion that his vice president should intervene at the 11th hour to overturn the certified results and his whipping up of the mob that stormed the Capitol were consistent with his constituti­onal duty.

The arguments against going forward with a trial are familiar. I have indulged in some version of them myself, in less extraordin­ary circumstan­ces. It’s time to turn the page; better to look forward than back. The last thing the country needs at this point is more focus on Trump, another politicall­y divisive spectacle in the form of a Senate trial. A trial, especially with the hurdle of two-thirds required for conviction, will end up hurting Joe Biden more than Trump; the infant administra­tion needs the Senate to concentrat­e on confirming its nominees and moving its legislativ­e agenda, not relitigati­ng the horrors of the previous incumbent.

These are not frivolous, but they are not, on balance, persuasive. What Trump did is too serious to simply move on. A few weeks delaying in approving Cabinet secretarie­s, a few weeks more with Trump in the headlines, is a small price to pay for ensuring that Trump faces the ultimate judgment, indelibly etched in history. If Senate Republican­s refuse to convict him, that stain, too, will be impossible to expunge.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States