Big Tent Ideas

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Trump’s Trial Will Go Down In The History Books As A Stupendous Legal Catastrophe

REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg

Daily Caller News Foundation logo
Alan M. Dershowitz Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of The Price of Principle: Why Integrity Is Worth The Consequences. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of "The Dershow" podcast.
Font Size:

Every American should be appalled at this selective prosecution. Today the target is former President Donald Trump. Tomorrow it may be a Democrat.

Some had asked whether a jury selected in Manhattan, which voted overwhelmingly against Trump, could be fair in judging the former president. But now that we have moved beyond this point, the real problem Trump has is that his best arguments are legal in nature: prosecutors appeared to cobble together misdemeanors and felonies in order to find something with which to “get Trump.” (RELATED: Stormy Daniels Nearly Derails Alvin Bragg’s Case Against Trump As Testimony Frustrates Judge)

The underlying crime is seemingly a minor misdemeanor — falsifying business records — which long ago expired under the statute of limitations. In order to turn it into a felony within the statute of limitations, prosecutors will have to show that Trump falsified the records in order to impact his election, thus constituting a federal election felony.

The problem is, however, that federal authorities have not prosecuted Trump for this federal election crime. Moreover, state prosecutors have no jurisdiction over federal election law.

Finally, we were not even clear, when the trial began, as to precisely which federal election laws the district attorney was relying on.

I have been teaching, practicing and writing about criminal law for 60 years. In all those years, I have never seen or heard of a case in which the defendant was criminally prosecuted for failing to disclose the payment of what prosecutors call “hush money.”

Alexander Hamilton paid hush money to cover up an affair with a married woman. Many others have paid hush money since. If the legislature wanted to criminalize such conduct they could easily enact a statute prohibiting the payment of hush money or requiring its disclosure. They have declined to do so.

Prosecutors cannot simply make up new crimes by jerry-rigging a concoction of existing crimes, some of which are barred by the statute of limitations others of which are beyond the jurisdiction of state prosecutors.

Appellate courts should be able to see through this ruse and reverse any conviction resulting from it. But that would likely occur after the election. In the meantime, however, a conviction prior to the election might influence independent voters to cast their ballot against a convicted felon.

In addition to the legal problems with the prosecution’s case, there are also some factual weaknesses. Prosecutors are relying on witnesses who have previously lied and whose credibility is very questionable.

They should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump authorized the statement in business records that the alleged hush money payments were legal expenses and that this statement was knowingly false. They might also have to prove that the reason he authorized the statements was to help him get elected, not to avoid embarrassment to his wife and children or losses to his business.

If the defendant were not Donald Trump and the venue were not Manhattan, this ought to be a slam dunk win for the defendant. Indeed, this extraordinarily weak case would never have been brought.

I am not a Trump political supporter. I voted for Joe Biden in the last election and I have an open mind about the coming election. But I want it to be fair. Whoever loses the election should not be able to complain about election interference by the weaponization of the criminal justice system for partisan advantage.

All Americans, regardless of political affiliation, should be appalled at this selective prosecution. Today the target is Trump. Tomorrow it may be a Democrat. After that, you and me. The criminal justice system is on trial in New York.

If Trump is convicted based on the distortion of law and facts that we’re seeing, the system will have failed us all.

Alan Dershowitz is professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and the author of “Get Trump,” “Guilt by Accusation,” and “The Price of Principle.” This piece is republished from the Alan Dershowitz Newsletter, and can be viewed here.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact