America has a crime problem: We treat criminal laws as if they were terms of service on a website — blindly agreeing and praying we’ll never need to know what they say. But it isn’t ordinary Americans who do the clicking; Congress clicks for us.
Worse, most legislators are as blind to what’s inside the laws they enact, or how to enforce them, as your average iTunes user clicking “Yes” on the latest Apple user agreement.
Consider a crime we keep hearing about — obstruction of justice. During his confirmation hearings, Attorney General William Barr sparred with senators about the meaning of the word “corruptly” as it’s used in the obstruction statutes.
Justice Thomas recalls why he wasn’t friends with Alito in law school: ‘Clarence, you were scary’
Trump’s lawyers put Dem AG on notice for targeting his family in NY fraud fight: ‘Cannot stand’
Evacuation Ordered After Canadian-Owned Gas Pipeline Springs Major Leak in US
Former NBA Star Posts Shocking, Manic Videos Asking His Coach for ‘Help’
Wes Moore dealt redistricting setback by Larry Hogan-appointed judge
NFL owner’s prostitution arrest puts top Dem committee on defense: ‘So desperate for cash’
Haitian Gang Attack Leaves 47 Dead, At Least 50 Kidnapped
Former Texas high school teacher arrested after probe into inappropriate student relationship
Jelly Roll Doubles Down, Tells Trump Supporters to Stop Listening to His Music
Judge clears path for ICE agent accused in Minnesota shooting case to leave Texas jail
Watch: UK Royal Family Stages Incredible Tribute to Dolly Parton at Buckingham Palace
America’s heartland comes face-to-face with 9/11 history as 25th anniversary nears
Mike Lindell Sues Minnesota Election Officials Over Recount ‘Bait and Switch’
Democrat officials charged for allegedly scamming COVID relief funds
Trump scores federal court win against House progressive accused of assaulting ICE
It was just one word, concerning one kind of crime, and yet there was sharp disagreement between the people writing laws and the man who would soon be enforcing them. Special counsel Robert Mueller spent 182 pages analyzing the president’s conduct under those same statutes, only to leave the ultimate question unresolved. When Barr returned for Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Sen. Dianne Feinstein seemed flummoxed when he explained that instructing someone to lie isn’t necessarily a crime.
For answers, many have turned to the cavalcade of legal analysts on cable news declaring assuredly that the president definitely had, or definitely hadn’t, committed obstruction. Those watching at home had to wonder: Shouldn’t there be an actual answer? Isn’t everyone looking at the same law? Surely America’s most telegenic legal minds and seasoned government officials can definitively answer the binary question of whether the president obstructed justice. But they haven’t. Now some are calling on Congress to answer it in impeachment proceedings.
This tiresome exercise could be undertaken with countless other federal laws. Is it a crime to remove a migratory bird that has taken up roost in your house? It depends. Can you cut the tag off a mattress? Again, it depends. What does it depend on? Well, that depends too. Lawyers are conditioned to accept this, but it’s no less unsettling that, even when the facts are clear, lawmakers, law enforcers, judges and lawyers still can’t agree on what the law itself makes a crime.
Justice Thomas recalls why he wasn’t friends with Alito in law school: ‘Clarence, you were scary’
Trump’s lawyers put Dem AG on notice for targeting his family in NY fraud fight: ‘Cannot stand’
Evacuation Ordered After Canadian-Owned Gas Pipeline Springs Major Leak in US
Former NBA Star Posts Shocking, Manic Videos Asking His Coach for ‘Help’
Wes Moore dealt redistricting setback by Larry Hogan-appointed judge
NFL owner’s prostitution arrest puts top Dem committee on defense: ‘So desperate for cash’
Haitian Gang Attack Leaves 47 Dead, At Least 50 Kidnapped
Former Texas high school teacher arrested after probe into inappropriate student relationship
Jelly Roll Doubles Down, Tells Trump Supporters to Stop Listening to His Music
Judge clears path for ICE agent accused in Minnesota shooting case to leave Texas jail
Watch: UK Royal Family Stages Incredible Tribute to Dolly Parton at Buckingham Palace
America’s heartland comes face-to-face with 9/11 history as 25th anniversary nears
Mike Lindell Sues Minnesota Election Officials Over Recount ‘Bait and Switch’
Democrat officials charged for allegedly scamming COVID relief funds
Trump scores federal court win against House progressive accused of assaulting ICE
It’s not just a federal problem. Nor is it an exclusively political one. The same day that the special counsel released his report, the highest court in the state of Washington issued an evenly split opinion concerning that state’s own obstruction statute. In it, eight justices of the Washington Supreme Court couldn’t agree whether a man’s refusal to open his door for police constituted a crime. There was no real dispute about the facts. There was a statute written in black and white. Yet the court split 4-4.
This kind of ambiguity is a problem for an executive branch charged with enforcing laws and a judiciary that applies them. It may soon become a very public problem for a Congress trying its hand at both. Mostly, however, it threatens all of us who are presumed to know the law, required to comply with it and barred from arguing ignorance of the law as an excuse.
If Congress really is about to embark on impeachment, perhaps lawmakers will learn a valuable lesson in the process. Let them slog through the muck of their own criminal statutes. Let them display how even they can’t agree on what the text of the law means. Then let America be reminded that we had better follow the untold thousands of laws written by these people or go to prison.
Justice Thomas recalls why he wasn’t friends with Alito in law school: ‘Clarence, you were scary’
Trump’s lawyers put Dem AG on notice for targeting his family in NY fraud fight: ‘Cannot stand’
Evacuation Ordered After Canadian-Owned Gas Pipeline Springs Major Leak in US
Former NBA Star Posts Shocking, Manic Videos Asking His Coach for ‘Help’
Wes Moore dealt redistricting setback by Larry Hogan-appointed judge
NFL owner’s prostitution arrest puts top Dem committee on defense: ‘So desperate for cash’
Haitian Gang Attack Leaves 47 Dead, At Least 50 Kidnapped
Former Texas high school teacher arrested after probe into inappropriate student relationship
Jelly Roll Doubles Down, Tells Trump Supporters to Stop Listening to His Music
Judge clears path for ICE agent accused in Minnesota shooting case to leave Texas jail
Watch: UK Royal Family Stages Incredible Tribute to Dolly Parton at Buckingham Palace
America’s heartland comes face-to-face with 9/11 history as 25th anniversary nears
Mike Lindell Sues Minnesota Election Officials Over Recount ‘Bait and Switch’
Democrat officials charged for allegedly scamming COVID relief funds
Trump scores federal court win against House progressive accused of assaulting ICE
Impeachment or not, the problem is already on display. We spent two years and tens of millions of dollars on an investigation conducted by dozens of lawyers, all for a non-answer on whether one person committed a particular crime. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of us could have violated any of the thousands of criminal laws on the books, and we would be hard-pressed to afford just one lawyer to defend us.
To be sure, criminal conduct is nuanced, and it’s impossible to write a perfect statute. But we shouldn’t ignore the danger in a system where lawmakers, the nation’s top prosecutor or a court of last resort can’t agree on whether something is a crime. Hopefully, lawmakers will soon spend less time politicking and more time making the law clearer.
Story cited here.
