Rule of Law

Trump Deluded Again on the Role of SCOTUS in Impeachment

Earlier this week, President Trump tweeted about the “[i]mpeachment [h]oax,” claiming that the “Radical Left has NO CASE” and asking, “Can we go to the Supreme Court to stop [it]?” The answer is clearly no.

When it comes to impeachment, the text of Constitution is straightforward, and the Supreme Court has no direct role in the proceedings. Article I plainly states that the “House of Representatives … shall have the sole Power of Impeachment,” and that “[t]he Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” The only constitutional reference to impeachment and the Supreme Court is that “[w]hen the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.”

Indeed, the Supreme Court itself has recognized that it has no direct role to play in the impeachment process.  In Nixon v. United States, Walter Nixon, Jr., a former Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, asked the Court to rule on the constitutionality of a Senate rule that allowed a Senate committee to hear impeachment evidence and report that evidence to the full Senate. But the Supreme Court refused to decide the question, explaining that “before we reach the merits of such a claim, we must decide whether it is ‘justiciable,’ that is, whether it is a claim that may be resolved by the courts. We conclude that it is not.”

This isn’t the first time that Trump has mistakenly suggested he could ask the Supreme Court to stop Congress from impeaching him. In April of this year, he tweeted: “If the partisan Dems ever tried to Impeach, I would first head to the U.S. Supreme Court.”  And, unfortunately, this isn’t the only context in which the President has demonstrated his ignorance of fundamental constitutional principles.

Fortunately, the President can’t will the Constitution to mean what he wants it to mean.  In the case of impeachment, the Constitution couldn’t be any clearer.

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
February 24, 2026

50+ Organizations Condemn Federal Authorities for Blocking Minnesota’s Independent Investigation into CBP Killing of Alex Pretti

WASHINGTON, DC — Today marks one month since the killing of Alex Pretti on January...
Rule of Law
February 20, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Rejects President Trump’s Claim of Unilateral Tariff Authority

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump...
By: Simon Chin
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Climate United Fund v. Citibank

In Climate United Fund v. Citibank, the en banc United States of Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can unilaterally abolish a mandatory grant program created by Congress.
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oregon v. Landis

In Oregon v. Landis, the Ninth Circuit is considering when states may prosecute federal officers for state crimes.
Rule of Law
February 4, 2026

‘This Occupation Has to End!’ Omar Argues After Homan Says Most Agents Will Stay in Minnesota

Common Dreams
“Every single ICE and CBP agent should be out of Minnesota,” the congresswoman said. “The...
Rule of Law
January 29, 2026

We, the People: Defending the U.S. Constitution As Immigration Raids Threaten Basic Rights

TriplePundit
With administration officials saying agents are immune to accountability, many are understandably wondering: What rights...