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.
Trump takes NORAD Santa calls with children, praises ‘clean, beautiful coal’ and ‘high-IQ’ person
Activists tied to LA bombing plot indicted on terrorism charges
DOJ discovers more than 1M potential Epstein records, further delaying file release
Post-Christmas Disaster: How 26 Million Pounds of Molasses Killed or Injured 170 in the Streets of Boston in 1919
Pentagon to send 350 National Guard troops to New Orleans as violent crime surges ahead of major events
Alito rips Supreme Court majority as ‘unwise’ for blocking Trump’s National Guard plan
Greta Thunberg Arrested After Caught Supporting Literal Anti-Jewish Terrorist Org – This Is the Kid the Left Platformed as a God for Years
California farming tycoon arrested in wife’s killing
Massie questions control of DOJ X account after report alleged White House takeover
New charges against DC National Guard shooting suspect open death penalty door
Shock and Awe: Fiery Rubio Imposes Unprecedented Sanctions on European Elites Who Attempted to Censor Americans
US Set to See Largest One-Year Decline in Murders in History: Crime Expert
Democrats warn Trump green-lighting Nvidia AI chip sales could boost China’s military edge
Australian state passes tighter gun restrictions after Bondi Beach attack
Prominent Rhode Island Democrat caught on video telling officer, ‘You know who I am?’ during DUI stop
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.
Trump takes NORAD Santa calls with children, praises ‘clean, beautiful coal’ and ‘high-IQ’ person
Activists tied to LA bombing plot indicted on terrorism charges
DOJ discovers more than 1M potential Epstein records, further delaying file release
Post-Christmas Disaster: How 26 Million Pounds of Molasses Killed or Injured 170 in the Streets of Boston in 1919
Pentagon to send 350 National Guard troops to New Orleans as violent crime surges ahead of major events
Alito rips Supreme Court majority as ‘unwise’ for blocking Trump’s National Guard plan
Greta Thunberg Arrested After Caught Supporting Literal Anti-Jewish Terrorist Org – This Is the Kid the Left Platformed as a God for Years
California farming tycoon arrested in wife’s killing
Massie questions control of DOJ X account after report alleged White House takeover
New charges against DC National Guard shooting suspect open death penalty door
Shock and Awe: Fiery Rubio Imposes Unprecedented Sanctions on European Elites Who Attempted to Censor Americans
US Set to See Largest One-Year Decline in Murders in History: Crime Expert
Democrats warn Trump green-lighting Nvidia AI chip sales could boost China’s military edge
Australian state passes tighter gun restrictions after Bondi Beach attack
Prominent Rhode Island Democrat caught on video telling officer, ‘You know who I am?’ during DUI stop
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.
Trump takes NORAD Santa calls with children, praises ‘clean, beautiful coal’ and ‘high-IQ’ person
Activists tied to LA bombing plot indicted on terrorism charges
DOJ discovers more than 1M potential Epstein records, further delaying file release
Post-Christmas Disaster: How 26 Million Pounds of Molasses Killed or Injured 170 in the Streets of Boston in 1919
Pentagon to send 350 National Guard troops to New Orleans as violent crime surges ahead of major events
Alito rips Supreme Court majority as ‘unwise’ for blocking Trump’s National Guard plan
Greta Thunberg Arrested After Caught Supporting Literal Anti-Jewish Terrorist Org – This Is the Kid the Left Platformed as a God for Years
California farming tycoon arrested in wife’s killing
Massie questions control of DOJ X account after report alleged White House takeover
New charges against DC National Guard shooting suspect open death penalty door
Shock and Awe: Fiery Rubio Imposes Unprecedented Sanctions on European Elites Who Attempted to Censor Americans
US Set to See Largest One-Year Decline in Murders in History: Crime Expert
Democrats warn Trump green-lighting Nvidia AI chip sales could boost China’s military edge
Australian state passes tighter gun restrictions after Bondi Beach attack
Prominent Rhode Island Democrat caught on video telling officer, ‘You know who I am?’ during DUI stop
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.
