New York Times Op-Ed: End Criminal Cases Against Trump, the People Have Spoken
An opinion piece published in The New York Times argues for the dismissal of all criminal cases against Donald Trump following his recent election victory. Written by Thomas Goldstein, a former appellate attorney and Harvard Law School lecturer, the article contends that since the election outcome reflects the will of the people, the legal proceedings should be abandoned to preserve the integrity of democracy. Goldstein states that Trump made these legal challenges a focal point of his campaign, and noted that the Republican candidate won both the Electoral College and popular vote. He mentions Trump is currently facing four criminal cases, with indications that they may not proceed further. Goldstein suggests that the unique and unusual legal theories behind these cases, particularly those involving state prosecutors, threaten political stability and warns of potential retaliatory actions against Democratic candidates in the future. He concludes that prioritizing these criminal cases over the democratic process is misguided, emphasizing the need for a government system capable of lasting for centuries.
The New York Times published an opinion piece calling for all the criminal cases being brought against Donald Trump to be dropped in light of his victory in this month’s election.
Thomas Goldstein — former appellate attorney, publisher of the SCOTUS blog, and lecturer at Harvard Law School — wrote a Nov. 15 article titled, “End the Criminal Cases Against Trump.”
“With the election now over, the courts have to decide quickly whether to move forward with the criminal cases against Donald Trump. Although this idea will pain my fellow Democrats, all of the cases should be abandoned,” he began.
Goldstein, who represented former Vice President Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election case Bush v. Gore, noted that Trump made the criminal prosecutions a central issue in his campaign and the people have spoken.
The Republican won the Electoral College vote 312 to 226, and the popular vote by approximately 76.8 million votes to Vice President Kamala Harris’ 74.3 million.
Goldstein then recounted that Trump still technically faces four criminal cases: two federal criminal and two state.
The Department of Justice has indicated that special counsel Jack Smith — the 2020 election interference and the classified documents case — will not be proceeding.
If they are not completely wrapped by the end of the current administration, they certainly will be dropped during the next.
On Friday New York Judge Juan Merchan removed the sentencing hearing from the court calendar in Trump’s business records case by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and is allowing the president-elect’s attorneys to file a motion to dismiss it.
🚨BREAKING: Judge Juan Merchan has granted President-elect Donald Trump’s request to file a motion to dismiss the charges in the so-called “hush money” case (New York v. Trump) and removed the sentencing date for the president-elect indefinitely.
The legal assault against… pic.twitter.com/3LIEzA75CP
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) November 22, 2024
Finally, Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis’ 2020 election interference case against Trump is currently at the state Court of Appeals. But the court issued an order Nov. 18 saying oral arguments were postponed until further notice, according to Newsweek.
Goldstein wrote concerning the New York and Georgia cases, “[T]he prosecutors’ legal theories were and are unusual, to say the least. Their premise is that financial shenanigans and political strong arming in hard-fought battles for the presidency are serious felonies that can be pursued by local prosecutors in local courts. But these are fundamentally federal, not state, concerns.”
“That doesn’t prove that they were brought for political reasons. But the Constitution trusts the judgment of the American people to decide whether the cases against Mr. Trump, as he has argued, were political and calculated to stop him from being elected,” he added.
Goldstein further argued, “For many Democrats, dismissing the cases feels profoundly wrong because they see them as the last chance to bring Mr. Trump to justice. In truth, support for the cases among many Democrats doesn’t seem to be based on confidence in the prosecutors’ legal theories and evidence. Instead, it seems to be driven by politics and hatred of Mr. Trump. That reinforces why they must be dismissed.”
The legal expert asked his fellow Democrats to imagine a world in which Republican state and local prosecutors went after Democratic presidential candidates. That is what will happen if the current litigation efforts were allowed to stand, Goldstein predicted.
He concluded, “[T]he Constitution isn’t concerned with preserving a couple of criminal cases. It is concerned with having a system of government that can hold our democracy together for centuries.”
The New York Times is certainly no friend of Trump, but it published a story anyway saying, for the sake of the country, the cases against the president-elect should end.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...