[Robert DeLong]

It’s really not such a stupid question, however, it would require Congress to advise & consent for the selection of a new Chief Justice. So highly unlikely that a current Chief Justice would be replaced and the current Chief Justice revert to being an Associate Justice. The Constitution only mentions a Chief Justice on the Supreme Court with regards to presiding over an impeachment process. But the question then becomes, who presides if a Chief Justice is the one being impeached? 8>)

[newzjunkey]

The constitution specifically mentions the Chief Justice presiding when a president is impeached because the Vice President aka president of the senate has a vested interest in the outcome. Presumably Pence would preside over a Roberts impeachment

[Cboldt]

There is also that constitutional "shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office." CJ receives a greater salary than Associates. Complicated mix of consitutional decree and Congressional power. I can;t imagine the Senate would accept a radical precedent for Trump. They would for a DEM.

[William Tell]

“... who presides if a Chief Justice is the one being impeached?”

From that Constitution thingy: “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided. “

The more interesting question might be: “Who presides if the Vice President is the one being impeached?”

Here’s a link to a short article on the topic.

https://www.lawliberty.org/2012/10/26/7350/