Jeannie Suk Gersen, a Harvard Law professor and New Yorker contributor, delves into the profound impacts of Donald Trump's indictments on American law and politics. She discusses how these legal battles tested the concept of presidential immunity, reshaping the future of political candidacy. Gersen explores the balance between accountability and democratic integrity, raising questions about public perception and the implications for upcoming elections. The conversation also touches on the ethical challenges surrounding executive pardons, particularly in the context of Biden's actions.
The legal challenges against Trump have inadvertently strengthened his electoral base, reinforcing a narrative of political persecution among his supporters.
The Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity has significant implications for future accountability and the political dynamics of presidential misconduct.
Deep dives
Overview of Criminal Cases Against Trump
Donald Trump faces four major criminal cases, which include two federal cases related to election interference and handling of classified documents, and two state cases focused on hush money payments and election tampering in Georgia. The Manhattan District Attorney's case led to Trump's conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records, marking a historical moment as he became the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a crime. However, the other cases are in limbo, with discussions about dismissals as Trump has secured a path toward re-election. This legal turmoil highlights the complex interplay between the judiciary and Trump's political ambitions.
Political Implications of Trump's Prosecution
The indictments against Trump have created a narrative of political persecution, which resonates with many of his supporters and potentially strengthens his electoral base. Even with a felony conviction in New York, public opinion does not seem significantly swayed against him, indicating that the prosecutions may not damage his electability as intended. This situation suggests a disturbing precedent where legal accountability could be perceived as a tactical move in political warfare, undermining the principle that no one is above the law. As such, the long-term effects of these cases extend beyond courtrooms, influencing the political landscape and the nature of campaigning.
Impact of Delayed Prosecution
Attorney General Merrick Garland's cautious approach to appointing a special counsel has drawn criticism for delaying accountability for Trump. The postponement of legal proceedings has resulted in the clock running out on key indictments, highlighting challenges in prosecuting a former president within the time constraints of legal proceedings. The complexity of these cases may suggest that had the investigations moved more swiftly, some outcomes could have been different; however, it is unlikely that a resolution would have distinctly shaped the electoral outcome. This indicates the inherent difficulties in navigating legal challenges intertwined with electoral politics.
Long-term Effects on the Presidency
The prosecutions have revealed a concerning precedent regarding presidential immunity, with the Supreme Court confirming that presidents may not be criminally prosecuted for actions carried out in their official capacity. This understanding significantly alters the accountability landscape for future presidents and has implications for legal recourse against presidential misconduct. The appointments of Trump's former lawyers to key positions in the Justice Department further exacerbates concerns over possible misuse of power in prosecuting political foes. This evolving dynamic could signal a troubling future for the rule of law, as the boundaries of legal accountability for political leaders are tested.
A year ago, Donald Trump was facing four separate criminal indictments, and had become the first President to be charged with and convicted of a felony. Now that Trump is President-elect, and with the Supreme Court having granted sitting Presidents broad immunity, the Justice Department’s efforts to hold Trump accountable appear to be over. Even so, Trump’s legal saga has radically changed American law and politics, the New Yorker staff writer Jeannie Suk Gersen argues. “These prosecutions forced the Supreme Court to at least answer the question [of Presidential immunity],” Gersen says. “It will affect the kind of people who run for President, and it will affect how they think of their jobs.”