Seeking a subpoena to force the president to testify would set up a constitutional showdown over the scope of judicial authority over a sitting president—a showdown that neither Mueller nor the courts should wish for.
Keith E. Whittington is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics at Princeton University. He teaches and writes about American constitutional theory and development, federalism, judicial politics, and the presidency. He is the author most recently of "Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech."
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
Does Congress still have war powers?
Does the president’s oath of office require him to uphold the Constitution as the judiciary understands it, or as he does?
Congress has the power to impeach executive officers beyond the president and vice president.
If use of the impeachment power is an exercise in forward-looking, political judgment, then it is worth thinking carefully about what the downsides might be of refraining to pursue an impeachment inquiry in the face of impeachable offenses
If Preisdent Trump were to remove Robert Mueller as special counsel, this would be a grave breach of constitutional norms. But constitutional crisis would set in only if congressional Republicans failed to hold the president to account.
Let’s say that you or your political ally have engaged in some behavior that have people talking about impeachment. You find yourself in impeachment territory. Is there no way out of that territory? If that were true, then your best option might just be to build a fort where you stand and cover-up, obstruct, deny and defend as aggressively as possible. Some politicians have taken this approach. It does not always end well.