Washington Post / YouTube Nadler threatens to hold Barr in 1557519752.jpg...
Jerry Nadler Washington Post / YouTube

Just because Wednesday’s first impeachment hearing before the House Judiciary Committee is going to consist of testimony from four legal experts rather than from witnesses to Trump’s extortion efforts in Ukraine, that does not mean the day is going to be without drama or impact. The opening statements of all four legal scholars testifying on Wednesday have now been released, and, if anything, they are far more forceful than anything that has previously been seen.

For example, Michael Gerhardt, the Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at UNC, has released his opening statement, and that statement says exactly what the nation needs to hear at this moment.

If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeachment process has lost all meaning, and, along with that, our Constitution’s carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil.

Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan is no less decisive in her statement.

Put simply, a candidate for president should resist foreign interference in our elections, not demand it. If we are to keep faith with the Constitution and our Republic, President Trump must be held to account.

Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, an expert on James Madison, spells it out explicitly.

These acts constitute high crimes and misdemeanors impeachable under the Constitution. By freezing aid to Ukraine and by dangling the promise of a White House visit, the president was corruptly using the powers of the presidency for personal political gain.

The last of the four legal experts making an appearance at the hearings on Wednesday is frequent television commentator Jonathan Turley. Turley’s presence was requested by the Republicans on the committee, and his opening statement is an astonishing 51 minutes long. It covers everything from commentary on A Man for All Seasons to the mood of his Goldendoodle. Really. It’s not so much a commentary as it is a filibuster by witness. Expect it to take a solid hour or more.

Liked it? Take a second to support Associate Editor on Patreon!

This is a Creative Commons article. The original version of this article appeared here.


  1. Where did the Republicans dig up their choice of a legal scholar? Granted I did not get much of his opening statement, but as they say about first impressions,… Plus in comparison to the other three legal scholars, it is like the Republicans picked this guy purposely to make a joke of this stage of impeachment process, just like they tried to do with the public hearings. Just shows why these Trumpublican Syncophants need to be voted out of office to cleanse confess of Trump’s swamp of corruption and total degradation of their honor, integrity and their office.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here