"The people made the Constitution, and the people can unmake it. It is the creature of their own will, and lives only by their will." - Justice John Marshall - Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheaton) 264, 387 (1821)
”Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” — President Ronald Reagan
I’m a bit reluctant to dive into the political waters. The last time I did was 8 years ago in 2015 when I expressed concern about the worthiness of the GOP nominee. But Thursday’s events in Manhattan require some kind of response because they represent a pivotal moment in the Constitutional history of the United States.
I realize that many will feel that the prosecution of Donald Trump was warranted for a wide variety of reasons way beyond the scope of the case, and that the felony conviction will send a signal to voters in November about what they should do in the ballot box. And that’s why I’m writing this - to address the use of a felony prosecution for a secondary goal of obtaining an electoral advantage, and what this means for the future.
“When the legal system is used to target political opponents, it creates a cycle of retaliation that can destabilize our political landscape. Today, one figure is under attack; tomorrow, it could be another. ”
Regardless of how you feel about Donald Trump, it's concerning when the law is used to suppress a political candidate. This kind of manipulation undermines the core principles of our democracy, which depend on fair and equal treatment under the law.
Using legal measures as political tools sets a dangerous precedent. The recent legal actions against Trump, perceived by many as efforts to diminish his political influence, exemplify this trend. This approach not only jeopardizes the integrity of our judicial institutions but also threatens the fairness of our electoral processes.
When the legal system is used to target political opponents, it creates a cycle of retaliation that can destabilize our political landscape. Today, one figure is under attack; tomorrow, it could be another. This fosters division and erodes trust in our democracy, making it harder to resolve differences through dialogue and democratic means.
It's essential to uphold the rule of law impartially. Legal protections should apply equally to everyone, regardless of political affiliation. Selective application or manipulation of these protections weakens the overall structure meant to safeguard our freedoms.
We need to maintain the integrity of our legal system, ensuring it remains a bastion of justice and fairness for all. By doing so, we protect not only individual rights but also the health and longevity of our democracy.
Let's strive for a future where the law is respected and upheld, free from political manipulation.
Now, I realize that some will think I did not go far enough with this assessment, and others will think I went too far. But you’re free to vote for who you prefer in this election - you’ve seen how both major candidates have done their jobs in non-election years and the choice is yours alone. But between now and then, we need to work to safeguard the principles of freedom and justice that have formed the bedrock of our nation, and we need to avoid the temptation to tear or cut little pieces off of the Constitution in order to gain a temporary electoral advantage.
Sincerely,
Michael D. Peabody, Esq.
President,
Founders’ First Freedom
Religious Liberty TV
****
P.S. As an avid Supreme Court watcher (who tries to pass this enthusiasm on to you through this newsletter, of course), I expect that the Supreme Court may very likely take up the Trump case very soon via the Judiciary Act of 1789 (which I’m not going to go into detail about) or some other mechanism since it raises a federal issue. It is not a mere coincidence that we’re starting to hear all kinds of scandalous news about Supreme Court justices who are given the unenviable task of sorting this out, and also not a mere coincidence that their legitimacy as worthy arbiters of the issue is being called into question.
This places the Supreme Court directly in the crosshairs, and just as the “felon” designation is not likely to be much more than a tag between now and November, the “legitimacy” of the Court will also be a tag.
If the Supreme Court loses its public mandate as an arbiter of justice, all bets are off as to what is next without the Court being perceived as providing guidance about what the Constitution means. Remember, the Supreme Court can only make decisions - it has no military or ability to tax (that’s the Executive Branch) and it makes no laws and has no ability to fund or defund the actions of the Executive Branch (that’s Congress). It can only state opinions and hope that the other branches follow them. This poses a real threat to the rule of law and to the Constitution.