Renowned legal scholar and Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz has weighed in on the recent indictment of former President Donald Trump in Georgia, expressing concerns about the implications for the rule of law.
Dershowitz drew parallels between Trump’s alleged actions and those of Al Gore’s legal team during the contentious 2000 presidential election.
Dershowitz pointed out that Gore’s team, including himself, had also challenged the election results through legal avenues, much like Trump’s efforts to contest the 2020 election outcome. “We challenged the election, and we did much of the things that are being done today and people praised us.
I wrote a bestselling book called ‘Supreme Injustice.’ Now they’re making it a crime,” Dershowitz stated.
The indictment in question stems from a years-long investigation into Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia.
The charges include violations of various laws, including the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO Act), conspiracy, and solicitation of violations of oath by a public officer.
Dershowitz voiced concerns about the broadening of the legal scope, suggesting that political actions, even those as charged as election disputes, should not be classified as crimes.
He emphasized that historically, such matters have been resolved through legal and legislative processes rather than criminal prosecution. “We’re supposed to go to court.
We’re supposed to go to Congress.
You can’t make those things crimes,” Dershowitz argued.
Drawing comparisons between Trump’s phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Al Gore’s strategy, Dershowitz highlighted the similarities. “It’s pretty much the same thing I did and Professor Lawrence Tribe did, and those of us who were on the Al Gore team,” he explained. “We did the same thing and Professor Tribe wrote a legal memorandum essentially laying out a strategy very similar to the strategy for which these folks are being indicted today.”
Despite the indictment, Dershowitz remained skeptical of its significance, particularly due to an earlier mishap in which the district attorney’s office mistakenly posted an indictment document before the grand jury’s vote.
He stressed that the grand jury appeared to be a mere formality, and the actual decision-making power lay with the prosecutors.
In conclusion, Dershowitz emphasized that the indictment should not be taken lightly, and the broader implications of prosecuting election-related disputes as crimes need to be carefully considered to preserve the integrity of the legal process.