The Whistleblower Inwards The Senate Impeachment Trial

I would similar to expand on a betoken that I made inwards a post service over at PrawfsBlawg. One specially hard effect that volition in all probability arise inwards the impeachment lawsuit is whether the whistleblower tin flame last compelled to testify. The President's lawyers volition virtually sure telephone phone this somebody every bit a witness together with fence that the President has a correct to appear upward the witnesses against him. The lawyers for the whistleblower (either straight or through the House managers) volition virtually sure object. They volition enjoin that the somebody is guaranteed anonymity yesteryear the whistleblower statute together with that his or her life volition last pose inwards danger yesteryear world disclosure. How should Chief Justice Roberts dominion on this issue? And how should the Senate respond to that ruling, every bit 51 senators tin flame overrule the Chief Justice?

There is no slow answer. I produce non believe that at that topographic point are whatsoever useful precedents from prior impeachment trials, though I desire to hold back to a greater extent than carefully at President Johnson's trial. One idea is that the Sixth Amendment does NOT apply to impeachment trials. It applies exclusively to criminal trials. With that said, confrontation together with cross-examination of an of import witness is a basic business office of a fair trial.  Under normal circumstances, y'all mightiness intend a compromise could last worked out. Maybe the President's lawyers could enquiry the whistleblower inwards private. Maybe the Senate could become into unopen session for that testimony. I doubt, though, that the whistleblower's lawyers volition conduct maintain something similar this. The argue is obvious. Five seconds after learning the whistleblower's identity (through his lawyers), the President volition last tweeting his get upward together with address out. Could the Chief Justice conclude that the whistleblower's testimony is non relevant if plenty other witnesses come upward forward? Perhaps.

What if the Chief Justice and/or the Senate insist that the whistleblower testify? To what extent tin flame the Senate compel attendance if a witness refuses? Note that on this point, the Attorney General volition in all probability last happy to prosecute on a contempt of Congress charge. Would such a prosecution, though, last consistent amongst the whistleblower statute?

This is non the exclusively hard legal occupation that volition arise inwards the trial. More on that later.