It is certainly true that come November 5, the nation’s voters may decide to shrug off the historic guilty verdict that the Manhattan jury rendered against Donald Trump on Friday afternoon. And that’s the conclusion many have reached about the seismic event that just took place in Room 1530 of the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse: It’s empty unless it ignites the will to send a popular denunciation of the former president this fall.
That analysis is, in my view, myopic.
It is possible that the American people can defeat the rule of law – a risk usually small that has advanced in recent years in the hands of the whip of tyrants. That was the message an angry and ashen Trump sent as he left the courtroom where a jury of seven men and five women gave the prosecution everything it asked for by convicting him on 34 felony charges. “The real verdict,” Trump said, “will be on November 5 by the people.”
In fact, the jury that delivered the real verdict, and the judge who presided over the hush money trial and is expected to sentence people in July, do their work conscientiously and even doggedly in the hailstorm of insults and threats from the defendant and supporters. . We have been waiting for years for a measure of accountability for the unrepentant former president. Finally came, and the center was held.
In contrast to the appreciation, the praise to the judges and Judge Juan M. Merchan is more deserved. After attending a number of trials, I feel that the goal is commensurate with the gravity of the task.
But it wasn’t just the determination of the jury, the judge and prosecutors that forced Trump to hold off on his weekly testimony in private and now face the possibility of a short prison sentence. And it’s not just the determination of the witnesses, some of whom remain loyal or at least love Trump, but understand their legal obligation to testify honestly.
Merchan’s strong powers reinforce his authority, but what makes the difference is his cloak, or what it represents. Trump is forced to submit to all regimes that ultimately derive from the deepest constitutional values ​​of fairness and equality before the law. How galling for someone who holds a deep contempt for – indeed cannot grasp – the rule of law rather than people.
What now? First, Trump is a modified figure in the law. No longer presumed innocent, he has been proven guilty, a convict, a serial offender. And like other inmates, he must sit for an interview with the probation office, which will prepare a report and recommendations for the judge based on an assessment of Trump’s crimes and acceptance of responsibility, among other factors. That is not good for someone who has spent his life unable to do wrong.
Merchan set the sentence for July 11, when he may have noticed Trump’s lack of remorse and contempt for the system that punished him. The sentence will be at the discretion of the judge, who will always try to do the same as he does for other similar criminals.
Next will come the inevitable appeal of the conviction, where Trump’s lawyers will argue that the trial was marred by some serious errors. And the legal issues here are complex enough to risk reversal regardless of how Merchan is handled.
But the measured speed of justice ultimately stopped serving Trump’s interests in this case. It will be half a year or more before there is any chance of reversing the sentence or conviction. At that time, Trump was considered a convict in another forum – and the current breakthrough results could only make convictions in three other criminal cases more credible – or the president took the wrecking ball to the entire legal system.
But then again, that prospect is definitely on the horizon. The full and fair operation of the rule of law to hold the former president accountable, however, is not.
On the contrary, it has often looked in recent years as if some combination of power, legal bluster, friends in high places (some in judicial robes) and the odd good fortune would combine to insulate Trump from the law. that should apply to all of us. Indeed, we can expect that in a few weeks in a few weeks, the US Supreme Court will give an opinion that will be both to raise the future president above the law and to prevent the most important trial that Trump faces, Federal Jan. . 6 cases, until after the election.
Today, however, the law triumphs in a way that is at once basic and majestic. Trump received a fair trial and due process, no more and no less than the next defendant who will sit in the same chair in the same dilapidated courtroom where he spent the last six weeks. Given all the powerful forces that have aligned themselves with the rule of law in recent years, we should see that as a victory in itself.
Harry Litman is the host of the “Talking Feds” podcast. with Say San Diego speaker series. @harrylitman
