Page:Impeachment of Donald J. Trump, President of the United States — Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives.pdf/166

 the House.

President Trump's remaining arguments fare no better. Through Mr. Cipollone's letter, he asserts the prerogative to defy all House subpoenas because he has unilaterally decided that he did not do anything wrong. He adds that the House must be acting with "partisan" and "illegitimate" motives. Notably, the President did not simply make these points at a press conference or on Twitter. He had the White House Counsel include them in a letter to the House as part of his formal legal basis for directing obstruction of the House impeachment inquiry.

To state the obvious, a President cannot obstruct a House impeachment inquiry because he believes his conduct was proper and sees no need for his acts to be investigated. Nor can he do so by impugning the House's motives or attacking its legitimacy. Once again, the Constitution vests the House with the "sole Power of Impeachment." These are judgments for the House alone to make, guided always by the Constitution. Otherwise, in contravention of the entire Anglo-American legal tradition, Presidents would truly be the judge of their own case. That is why the Framers gave the impeachment power to Congress, not the President, and it is why the House and Senate, respectively, have "sole Power" to impeach and to adjudicate articles of impeachment.

On this score, the Supreme Court's decision in Walter Nixon v. United States is instructive: "Judicial involvement in impeachment proceedings, even if only for purposes of judicial review, is counterintuitive because it would eviscerate the important constitutional check placed on the Judiciary by the Framers. [Judge] Nixon's argument would place final reviewing authority with respect to impeachments in the hands of the same body that the impeachment process is meant to regulate." In