Legal experts argue that the charges brought against Trump in Georgia go against democratic norms.

The Georgia grand jury’s indictment of former President Donald Trump over‌ his efforts to overturn 2020 election results may violate democratic norms ‌but that doesn’t mean the ⁢case will‌ be resolved quickly, legal​ experts told The ⁢Epoch Times.

Their comments came after President Trump and 18 co-defendants—including several of his former attorneys—were indicted in Fulton ​County, Georgia, late on Aug. 14 over​ President Trump’s efforts to contest the election in ⁢Georgia.

Charges range from violating Georgia’s Racketeer ‌Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, soliciting the violation of an oath by⁢ a⁤ public officer, conspiracy to commit forgery in‌ the first ⁢degree, and conspiracy to commit filing of false documents.

Mark Miller, an attorney at the Pacific⁤ Legal Foundation,⁣ said that although he’s neither a ⁤supporter nor opponent of President Trump, he’s worried about a growing trend.

The new case, along with prosecutions in New York, Florida, ⁤and the ​nation’s capital, each reflect a troubling tendency.

“Our country seems to be falling into criminalizing politics. It⁢ doesn’t serve the country’s best interest for either party to criminalize what is already ⁣a dirty game, yet here we are,” he said.

Mr. Miller is disturbed by the use of RICO, which was first enacted⁤ at ⁤the federal level in 1970 to go after ‍the mafia. More than 30 states have adopted their own ⁣RICO statutes.

But because the law was written “very broadly,” it has been used to⁤ prosecute people that RICO⁤ “wasn’t really intended to go after.”

“Most notoriously,” RICO was​ used ​to prosecute pro-life‍ activist⁢ Joseph ⁢Scheidler ​for protesting against ​abortion.

But the Supreme ​Court ruled in his favor in 2006, saying RICO “was not meant to go that far, that⁢ Joe’s ​free ‌speech rights cannot be curtailed by claiming he was⁤ threatening other ​constitutional rights,” Mr. Miller said.

President Trump will argue that “he’s allowed to believe⁤ and say that he‌ thinks he won ​the election, and as applied here ​in Georgia, ‍that he thinks⁤ a recount would⁤ have turned up the votes that he needed to​ win—no different than [when] Vice President [Al] Gore⁣ felt [in the 2000 election] that if you counted​ every dimpled chad in ⁢Florida, ‍he would have ​won,” according to Mr. Miller.

“And then you ​layer​ on‍ top of​ it, that so many of these co-defendants are lawyers,” ⁢he said.

“So now you’re not just saying ​that President Trump’s not allowed to believe that he⁢ won and try and fight the​ outcome no different than Vice President Gore, but you’re saying​ that ⁢he can’t rely upon lawyers.

“These lawyers are giving Trump⁤ advice, saying, ‘Yes, you can seek‌ to overturn the election, and here’s the strategy.’ Now​ it’s ‘no, you shouldn’t have listened⁣ to those lawyers—in fact, what they were telling you to do⁢ was ‌criminal.’”

Vice President Gore challenged the outcome in 2000, as did John ​Kerry in 2004⁤ and Hillary Clinton in 2016,⁢ and “we all know about 1960 with Nixon and Kennedy in Chicago.”

“It’s just not unreasonable for Americans to believe ‍that their candidate got shafted, and we’ve never⁢ previously said that that amounts to criminal behavior,” Mr. Miller said.

Before these Trump indictments started, ⁣“it seemed ‍that the country was moving on,” but now “every time he’s indicted, he⁢ seems to get‍ more popular,” he said.

RICO Lawyer ⁤Weighs In

Attorney Etan Mark of Mark, Migdal, and⁢ Hayden in Miami, who has ​handled many RICO⁣ cases, said he wasn’t surprised​ that the charges were ⁢brought under RICO, which‍ he‌ described as “a useful statute when you’re looking to encompass claims against a scattered group of people without any real formal affiliation,⁤ but they are all working towards a common‌ objective.”

The indictment⁣ begins “with the premise that it’s a⁢ crime​ to try to overturn a federal election,” and then officials are “delineating all of the things that Donald Trump did‌ or said in furtherance of that particular crime,” including statements on social media and communications with state officials in Georgia.

“There’s obviously a difference between using the judicial process to claim that there’s been some defects in connection with the election, and getting in front of a group of people and making false allegations,” Mr. Mark said.

The difference between Mr.​ Gore and ‍President Trump is that once the courts had ‍ruled, “Gore conceded.”

But President Trump went on national ⁢television telling “everybody who would listen that⁤ the election was stolen and the results are illegitimate … [and] he used his people and he himself ​participated in commu