Connect with us

Published

on

Alan Dershowitz believes one of the “most important” developments in the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump happened Friday.

Speaking with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Friday, the Harvard law professor explained the Supreme Court — by agreeing to hear a trio of cases involving subpoenas for the president’s financial records — just “pulled the rug out of part two of impeachment.”

“Look, the most important development happened today,” Dershowitz said. “The Supreme Court of the United States absolutely pulled the rug out of part two of the impeachment referral by granting certiorari, by granting review in a case where Trump challenged a congressional subpoena. And the Supreme Court said we’re going to hear this case.”

“Think of what that message is: It’s Trump was right,” he continued. “You don’t have to comply with a subpoena of Congress unless a court tells you you have to comply.”

“Now, we don’t know how the court is going to come out. But they made it clear that’s a viable issue,” Dershowitz went on to say. “So, that charge, that ground of impeachment, should be immediately removed by the House and not sent to the Senate. There’s nothing to it anymore after the Supreme Court today said you’re entitled to a review on an issue when the president challenges the subpoena power of Congress.”

“It’s all done. It’s over,” Dershowitz said.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments for the cases in March, and will likely issue their opinion in June 2020.

The case has significant implications for presidential immunity — in this case, whether a sitting president can resist subpoenas for their financial records — and as Dershowitz explained, the current impeachment proceedings.

Indeed, impeachment article two, which centers on Trump’s alleged obstruction of Congress, charges that Trump has “directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives.”

If the Supreme Court finds that Trump has sufficient authority to resist certain congressional subpoenas, the implications related to impeachment are obviously significant.

Advertisement
7 Comments
  • sepepper says:

    Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler have committed arson against the Democrat party and the House of Representatives by their unprecedented irresponsible actions of trying to convict a sitting President of the United States without proper judicial review. ONLY because Trump has challenged them, resulting in the SCOTUS’s decision to hear his case against them, has the Constitutional authority been restored to this whole impeachment trainwreck that Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler started. They are SABOTEURS and they should all be prosecuted as such.

  • Gerry says:

    There is absolutely zero reason to reveal his financial records.

    • Wilson says:

      Pilosi just wants to know if he has more vodka in his cabinet than her so people will stop trolling her twitter saying she drinks more than a drunken Irishman.

  • Jack Worthington says:

    I hope Trump wins and the hate mongering, economics dishonest, prejudiced, vituperative, immoral, commie/socialist Democrats are turned out in droves. That said, politics is violence and political government is the bane of humanity; it is not Christian and voting is an act of violence. We would be wise to terminate political government. In Revelation we are taught that the troika of evil, that wicked, enslaving consort of politics, commerce and false religion, will be destroyed in the end. We would be wise to heed the message.

  • susan says:

    Obstruction of Congress?? You mean the same Congress who has been calling for his impeachment from day one? The SCOTUS will have a hard time reconciling that one that’s for sure!
    Anyone with a half of a brain can see that the entire thing is unjust and unmerited. Even the unhinged MSM is starting to realize that the impeachment was a bad idea!

  • Matt says:

    Stupidity is there aim.

  • Evangeline King says:

    To me it should’ve been done the day it started because this was a preplanned impeachment since he won the election. He hadn’t even taken office yet to do anything good or bad when they planned this. For that alone it should have never been allowed by law to continue.

  • CF
    >