On the recordJanuary 29, 2020
Mr. Chief Justice, I have a question on behalf of Senator Markey and myself, and I send it to the desk. The CHIEF JUSTICE. Thank you. The question is as follows: Supreme Court Justice Byron White, in a concurring opinion in Nixon v. United States (1993), acknowledged that the Senate ``has very wide discretion in specifying impeachment trial procedures,'' but stated that the Senate ``would abuse its discretion'' if it were to ``insist on a procedure that could not be deemed a trial by reasonable judges.'' If the Senate does not allow for additional evidence and the testimony of key witnesses with firsthand knowledge of President Trump's actions and intentions, would a ``reasonable judge'' conclude these proceedings constitute a constitutionally fair trial? Mr. Manager SCHIFF. I think the answer is no. I don't know that we need to look to the words of a prior Justice to tell us that a trial without witnesses is not really a trial. It is certainly not a fair trial. If the House moves forward with impeachment and it comes before the Senate and wants to call witnesses and wants to make its case and is told ``Thou shalt not call witnesses,'' that is not a fair trial. I think the American people understand that without reading the case law. They go to jury duty themselves every year, and they see that the first thing that takes place after a jury is sworn in is the government makes its opening statement, the defense makes theirs, and then begins the calling of witnesses.…





