Chicago Sun-Times

Impeachmen­t over, the danger of the Dershowitz doctrine

- LYNN SWEET lsweet@suntimes.com | @lynnsweet

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s impeachmen­t trial ended in an acquittal on Wednesday after Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said, “Senators, how say you,” and the Republican­s in the Senate, except for one, rose to say “not guilty.”

Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah was the only Republican to breaks ranks and say Trump was guilty of abuse of power, though not obstructio­n of Congress.

As Trump’s Senate trial solemnly concluded on Day 13, the only suspense by the time of roll calls on two articles was whether Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia would side with his Democratic colleagues.

He did.

Several of Manchin’s Democratic colleagues, clued in, backslappe­d and hugged him before the votes for sticking with the team.

The chamber was packed for the first time to witness an outcome never in doubt. There were never the 67 votes needed to convict.

Two members of Trump’s 2016 campaign team were in the gallery — manager Corey Lewandowsk­i and his deputy, David Bossie. I saw Bossie make a fist and pump it slightly to mark Trump’s victory after Roberts declared Trump acquitted.

The third presidenti­al impeachmen­t trial in the nation’s history yielded a president emboldened, not humbled. We saw that in Trump’s defiant State of the Union address on Tuesday night.

Trump is now unrestrain­ed and unrepentan­t.

That’s the dangerous legacy of the Dershowitz doctrine, spawned at the impeachmen­t trial by one of Trump’s defense lawyers, retired Harvard Law School Professor

Alan Dershowitz.

Dershowitz provided a license for future excess from Trump as he offered up, in his defense of the president, an extraordin­ary and expansive view of presidenti­al powers.

Trump was impeached on two articles: abuse of power and obstructio­n of Congress. The House impeached Trump for pressuring Ukraine to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. Hunter had the extraordin­arily poor judgment to land a lucrative position on the board of Burisma, a Ukraine energy company, while his father was in office.

Under the Dershowitz doctrine, acting to advance a personal political goal — such as re-election to public office — is in and of itself in the public interest.

“Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest. And mostly you are right. Your election is in the public interest,” Dershowitz said. He was replying to a question from Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, about whether, as a matter of law, it matters if there was a quid pro quo.

“And if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachmen­t,” Dershowitz argued.

Citing President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War Dershowitz said when “Lincoln told General Sherman to let the troops go to Indiana so that they can vote for the Republican party — let’s assume the president was running at that point — and it was [in] his electoral interest to have these soldiers put at risk the lives of many other soldiers who would be left without their company — would that be an unlawful quid pro quo?

“No, because the president, A) believed it was in the national interest but B) he believed ... his own election was essential to victory in the Civil War. Every president believes that. That is why it is so dangerous to try to psychoanal­yze a president, to try to get into the intricacie­s of the human mind. Everybody has mixed motives and for there to be a constituti­onal impeachmen­t based on mixed motives would permit almost any president to be impeached.”

In the Spring of 2004, I audited Dershowitz’s criminal law class when I was a fellow at Harvard’s Institute of Politics.

Dershowitz was a wildly entertaini­ng professor, a raconteur. Dershowitz used his own celebrated cases — from Claus von Bülow to Martha Stewart and more — in his class.

I dug up my notes. “A confession,” Dershowitz once told us, “could be a harmless error.”

Everything, however, cannot be explained away by claiming no harm. We’ll see what the Dershowitz doctrine unleashed.

Dershowitz later tried to walk back his Trump defense. But the damage is done.

The lead House impeachmen­t manager, Rep. Adam Schiff, DCalif., in his closing argument, implored Republican­s not to take the cover Dershowitz offered. Do not, Schiff urged, “fall back on a theory of presidenti­al power so broad and unaccounta­ble that it would allow any occupant of 1600 Pennsylvan­ia Avenue to be as corrupt as he is.”

 ?? VIA AP SENATE TELEVISION ?? Alan Dershowitz answers a question during the impeachmen­t trial of President Donald Trump on Jan. 29.
VIA AP SENATE TELEVISION Alan Dershowitz answers a question during the impeachmen­t trial of President Donald Trump on Jan. 29.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States