Assassinations Are Okay

It is easy to get caught up in all of the vile, dangerous and non-sensical pronouncements of Donald J. Trump (he recently said that Abraham Lincoln should have negotiated with the South and thereby prevented the Civil War — and if he had done so, “you probably wouldn’t even know who Abraham Lincoln was.”) The problem is that if we ignore it, or just laugh it away, we run the danger of normalizing his behavior. On the other hand, the more we talk about it, the more he does it. I am sick of the guy and wish we could focus on defining our nation’s course going forward, rather than dealing with him. Unfortunately, the reality is that he is here to stay, whether or not he gets a second term.

Sometimes, we really need to pay attention. One of those times occurred this week and it was not Trump speaking but rather his knowledgeable and experienced attorneys making what they felt was a reasoned and Constitutional argument in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. A three judge panel is hearing Trump’s appeal of a lower court decision that he does not have total immunity from prosecution for any actions that he took as president. His lawyers claim that any president has total immunity as evidenced by over 200 years of our history where no president has ever been criminally tried for actions taken while president. Which is true. Mainly because no previous president committed crimes while in office. (The relevant exception is Richard M. Nixon. He accepted a pardon which is considered an admission of guilt.)

Without getting too far down into the inner workings of the law, especially since I am not an expert, my understanding is that Trump’s attorneys are arguing that under the Constitution, a president must be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate before he or she can be prosecuted for a crime. They base their argument on Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the Constitution which says:

“Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.“

In other words, they argue, no conviction in the Senate, no prosecution for a crime. Which turns the established interpretation of the clause upside down and opens up a whole can of worms over hypothetical situations where the president can literally get away with murder. The Court of Appeals and Trump’s lawyers went there.

Judge Florence Y. Pan asked Trump’s lead attorney Mr. D. John Sauer if any president could be charged for ordering SEAL Team Six (the Navy’s elite special forces unit) to assassinate a political rival. The reply by Mr. Sauer was that a president could only be tried if the House impeached him and the Senate convicted him. Without those preconditions, there was no possibility under the Constitution to prosecute him. 

This was no wild claim made during a Trump rambling campaign speech in front of his adoring followers. This was the legal argument in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

The hypotheticals cascade from there. The president could murder anyone and resign before being impeached. The president could murder a rival and then have his non-supporters in the Senate killed before he was convicted. The mind can run loose on any number of scenarios. Mr. Sauer argued that a president was immune from prosecution for all of that unless impeached and convicted in the Congress.

This is what we have reaped for putting Trump center stage.

I have no idea whether Trump or any other president would try to eliminate all political opposition through murder. What it does tell me is that should the court decide that a president is immune from prosecution for any actions while president, then Trump will use that finding to his full advantage. He will undertake all kinds of previously unimaginable activities as president if he thinks it will help him to get whatever he wants and he cannot be held accountable. 

To be clear, there are some complications to finding that a president can be prosecuted for any action taken while president. In Trump’s mind that means he can prosecute Presidents Obama and Biden should he so desire for any action of theirs that he decides was “criminal.” The Appeals Court (and likely the Supreme Court where the case could go next) will have to figure out a way to define or limit the parameters for prosecution. We must all remember as well that presidents do not prosecute people. The citizens of the United States prosecute people. Grand juries indict people. A jury of our peers hears cases involving the alleged crimes and must reach a unanimous guilty verdict. Laws must be followed. Yet, it is clear by Trump’s arguments that he thinks he is above the law and I, for one, have no doubt that should he get into the White House again, he will ignore any limits that may have constrained his predecessors.

When we worry that we spend too much time, energy and resources on thinking about Trump, remember that he thinks assassinations are okay.