Although former president Donald J. Trump has not pleaded guilty to the charges against him in various states such as Georgia for interfering with elections, courts have indicted him and investigations have found evidence in favor of the states. Despite results from Iowa’s primary that project Trump will outpace his opponents and polling results that place Trump ahead of all other Republican candidates, the charges against the former president have raised questions about his ability to run and win the presidency. Nonetheless, Trump’s unwillingness to show his face at Republican presidential debates demonstrated his confidence in beating his opponents; however, his petition to the Supreme Court of the United States(SCOTUS), may demonstrate his insecurity.
Monday, special counsel and prosecutor Jack Smith asked the SCOTUS to review Trump’s immunity petition regarding the charges against him. Trump hopes that the Court will provide him with absolute immunity given that the alleged election interference occurred during his presidential term. Nonetheless, the SCOTUS should make the right choice: to preserve democracy and its values. Consequently, Trump should follow the same courses of action as any other citizen who has received or would receive these charges.
The former president and his supporters believe that his actions do not warrant the same review as any other citizen because the alleged interference occurred during his time in office. Furthermore, they believe that the prosecution’s actions against him have taken jabs at his ability to run and win the presidency.
“ ..Usually, people would agree that everyone needs to follow the same laws because just because you got elected in a position, it does not make you free of punishment. If any person who was elected hurt someone, we would all think that that is wrong and it doesn’t get excused just because you are the president. I think the same idea is here, too, you don’t get to be free from interfering in an election just because you used to be in the White House. It’s not how it works,” senior Grayson Hodges said.
Despite the opponents’ flawed thinking, any dismissal of his charges violates a core principle of the United States: the “rule of law”. This infamous concept remains easily describable and definable: US laws apply to every citizen, and nobody stands above the law. This notion may seem practical to the majority of Americans, so one can only hope that the conservative-dominant SCOTUS preserves this core American value by rejecting his petition for immunity and by allowing his pending charges to stand.
“No, I don’t think that they should grant him immunity. He is a citizen and he needs to be in court like everyone else. Nobody should excuse him for that. Also, this is not something that we hear of often, so I don’t know why we are changing our ways just so he doesn’t get punished like everyone else,” Hodges said.
Fulton County has indicted the defendant based on election interference, a felony in Georgia punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 and/or a sentence of 10 years in prison. Trump’s alleged election interference threatens democracy, the Electoral College and the validity of any elections that have involved or will involve him. Furthermore, the former president’s acquaintances and representatives such as Trump’s former federal lawyer Sidney Powell have already admitted to interfering with Georgia’s election. Powell also agreed to testify against Trump to aid the prosecution to convict him of his charges.
As someone who wishes to run and win the presidency of the US, he should gain the trust of the American people by allowing the prosecution to run its course. The outcome of the Electoral College—especially in a swing state like Georgia— determines the nation’s fate and tampering of any kind serves as a threat to democracy. Furthermore, if Trump claims innocence, the prosecution’s evidence should prove insufficient. Anyone who remains innocent will likely not hold compelling evidence against them—or, at least not enough evidence to convince the court that the defendant committed the illegal acts.
Ultimately, the defendant’s petition to SCOTUS proves three claims about the former president: one, he does not share the core American values that the founding fathers intended for this country; two, his confidence remains a mask to hide his insecurity about his ineligibility to run and win; and three, his petition for immunity only reveals that Trump likely committed the illegal acts and, therefore, he serves as the ultimate threat to democracy. SCOTUS must decide: which takes precedence— a person’s reputation or democracy?
