Chief Justice Roberts At Senate Today, Senators To Be Sworn In As Jurors For Trump’s Impeachment Trial
January 16, 2020
THE TIME HAS COME|
The chief justice of the United States, JOHN G. ROBERTS JR. will be at the Senate today where he will be sworn in to preside over the historic impeachment trial of PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP. Roberts will also oversee the swearing in of senators as jurors. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL has said the trial will get underway “in earnest” next week.
AGE IS JUST A NUMBER|
The Supreme Court yesterday heard an age discrimination case regarding federal law that says that “all personnel decisions” made in the federal workforce “shall be made free from age discrimination.” There is disagreement in the case between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Trump administration on the interpretation of that law. The EEOC has long held the position that if a federal worker can prove age was a factor in being denied a job or a promotion, they are entitled to back pay or remedies. However, the administration thinks that the employee would have to prove that age was the only factor. NPR’s Nina Totenberg explains.
“In a lively Supreme Court argument on Wednesday about what older federal workers must show to prove age discrimination, the justices were unusually engaged. Perhaps that was because they are themselves older federal workers, albeit ones with life tenure.” Adam Liptak with The New York Times reports on yesterday’s age discrimination case which concerned a pharmacist who said she was denied promotions, benefits and training opportunities by the Department of Veterans Affairs at least partly because of her age. CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS invoked the popular phrase – “OK, Boomer” – during yesterday’s arguments. It was the first time that phrase made it into a Supreme Court debate.
Linda Greenhouse with The New York Times shines a light on the issue of standing. She points to cases playing out this term in which the Trump administration’s lawyers have “weaponized the doctrine of standing.” She writes, “It may seem an oddly dry choice of topic with a presidential impeachment about to get underway and the world flying apart at an even faster pace than usual. But as I hope these current examples show, standing is a crucially important component of the power of the federal courts. Judges must dismiss a lawsuit that lacks a plaintiff with standing. In the cases I’ve listed, contested questions of standing are playing out in the shadows. I want to hold them up to the light. The picture is not a pretty one. It could go far to defining the current Supreme Court term.”
OTHER NEWSThe National Law Journal
“The U.S. Supreme Court sounded ready Tuesday to loosen up what some intellectual property lawyers contend is a rigid rule requiring a threshold showing of willfulness to recover infringer’s profits for a trademark violation.”
The Chief Justice Who Presided Over The First Presidential Impeachment Trial Thought It Was Political SpectacleThe Washington Post
“Chase consulted the Constitution, which said the ‘Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.’ That meant the Senate’s highest officer was in charge. But it also said, ‘When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.’ So Chase would preside. Next problem: The Constitution gives no guidance about what ‘preside’ actually means. Chase took it upon himself, Niven wrote, to pressure the Senate to ‘be organized in some particulars as a court’ and Chase ‘insisted he should rule on the competency of witnesses and on the evidence.'”