Mitch McConnell should recuse himself
Senate jurors are expected to be impartial. The majority leader is anything but.
This afternoon, if all goes according to schedule, all 100 members of the United States Senate will take an oath to "do impartial justice" as jurors in the impeachment trial of President Trump. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) will be among those sworn in to judge the president's case.
If he takes the oath seriously, McConnell's first act after that should be to recuse himself.
McConnell won't do that, of course — he is the honey badger of American politics. But there can be no question that McConnell has no intention of approaching Trump's impeachment with impartiality. He has already passed judgment on the House of Representatives' case against the president — calling the Articles of Impeachment "weak" — and, more troubling, promised "total coordination" with the White House in steering the Senate trial to its conclusion.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
"This is a political process. There is not anything judicial about it," he said in December. "Impeachment is a political decision."
Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.) called for McConnell's recusal in December. She will serve at the trial as one of the House-appointed impeachment managers, and on Wednesday said she still believes McConnell should step aside.
"For the Senate Majority Leader to publicly announce that he has no intentions of being impartial and, as a matter of fact, he's coordinating every step with the White House and there will be no difference between the White House and his views, is absolutely shameful," she said in a press conference. "It's hard to take that one back and put that toothpaste back in the tube."
Demings is right.
McConnell is too, sort of. It is true that the Senate is a political body. Most of its members have dreamed about being president; all of them have risen to their current positions — and stayed there — by being obsessively attuned to donors, voters, and anybody else with influence over their careers. Asking the most political people in the world to put politics aside and be impartial is nearly impossible. Even the Founders saw that.
And yet there's that darned oath.
The impeachment oath doesn't allow for exceptions. It doesn't obligate its takers to "do impartial justice" unless senators really like the president, or unless the political incentives make it difficult. It simply commands impartiality.
The three years of Trump's presidency have featured a lot of public pondering about why Republicans go along with his worst behavior, why — with rare exception — leaders like McConnell can't call him out, oppose him, or otherwise "put country over party." There are a lot of answers. Some of them involve their fear of Trump and his ability to end their political careers. Some of it is that they see what Trump has given them — tax cuts, deregulation, and a slew of conservative judges — and have decided this president's downsides are worth the benefits. And many Republicans don't put country over party because they truly believe that what is good for one is also good for the other.
That should be no surprise. Test a few Democrats, and you'd probably find they possess a similar belief.
Impeachment is different, though. The oath challenges senators to think hard and critically about the difference between what is good for the party and what is good for the country. It suggests that there is a higher duty than winning the next election, something more important than pledging allegiance to one's own biases. It requires politicians to do something they almost never have to do: be unselfish. Impartiality may be a nearly impossible standard, but there is something to be said for trying to live up to it.
McConnell probably won't make that attempt. He will take the oath and then immediately violate it — even if, as law professor Lawrence Lessig has suggested, that violation makes him a perjurer. Who, after all, will hold him accountable?
The impeachment trial is meant to judge Trump. But the ramifications go beyond this presidency. History is already starting to render its verdict on the honor of McConnell — the impeachment trial is one more piece of evidence that will find him wanting.
Want more essential commentary and analysis like this delivered straight to your inbox? Sign up for The Week's "Today's best articles" newsletter here.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
Why ghost guns are so easy to make — and so dangerous
The Explainer Untraceable, DIY firearms are a growing public health and safety hazard
By David Faris Published
-
The Week contest: Swift stimulus
Puzzles and Quizzes
By The Week US Published
-
'It's hard to resist a sweet deal on a good car'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
What is Mitch McConnell's legacy?
Talking Point Moving on after a record-setting run as Senate GOP leader
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published