In the Supreme Court, Has It Become Politics Over Law?

In the recent Supreme Court hearing of arguments for and against Tump's claim of absolute immunity from prosecution ("4 Takeaways," April 25), three of the conservative judges - Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavenaugh - put forth questions/arguments which were almost ludicrous in their lack of relevance to the issue at hand.

These three conservative judges basically said that a president should not be subject to politically motivated prosecution by a vindictive successor.  We can all agree with that.  But this argument is not relevant to judging Trump's claim to immunity.  The fact that in rare instances a criminal statute could be misused is no reason not to provide for prosecution of the crime.

First, the question is whether a past-president should be immune from prosecution from potentially criminal acts committed while in office.  The further question is whether this should apply to both official and non-official acts, or just non-official acts.  

Prosecution for criminal action has various bars that must be met to justify prosecution.  Regardless how zealous the prosecutor or vindictive the successor, there has to be alleged criminal action.  This is not about challenging a president's motives for his official acts in office, regardless how criticized he or she may be.  Supporting particular legislation or arguing for a change in regulation, regardless of the motive, would not constitute criminal action under anyone's definition.

Which brings me to the second point.  All the conservative justices refused to look at the facts involved in this case.  Yet in judging whether a claim of immunity is appropriate, the facts of the case are extremely relevant.  You have first the theoretical question of absolute immunity, and once that is decided, whether the case before the court warrants such immunity. Trump is alleged to have defrauded the government by denying the results of the election – not by challenging them in court which is his right and which he did – but continuing to contest them after losing the court cases and further by attempting through various means to subvert the election and remain in the Presidency.

These facts are relevant because they show why the grant of immunity requested is not appropriate, why such matters must be subject to criminal prosecution.  They go to the heart of the strength and validity of our democracy.

The Palestinian/Israel Conflict - A Reality Check

I have for decades been critical of Israel's actions towards Palestinians, both as citizens of Israel and the Palestinian authority.  

The founders of Israel were so caught up in the millennia of persecution, mostly recently the Holocaust, that Jews had faced at the hands of other governments and religions that they understandably wanted to create a Jewish homeland – Jewish.  But seeking that homeland in a region where they had a minor contemporary presence, based instead upon the Bible, was bound to create problems.

Because they were Jews and because they were displacing Palestinians who had lived in the region for generations, they were faced with enemies all around them who wanted to obliterate Israel from the map.  And so they responded to defend themselves in the only way they could – militarily.

Through the decades since the founding of the state of Israel, this has been the dynamic in the region.  And the fear for their security led Israel to make at least one huge mistake – they treated the Palestinians who chose to remain in Israel and become Israeli citizens like second class citizens.  Palestinians were segregated in their own villages which did not receive the funding and attention that Jewish villages did.  Yes, Palestinians had rights and had access to education and medical services, but they were second class citizens in other ways.  And they were not part of the Israeli army because they weren't trusted.

There is no shortage of fingers to point in this conflict.  The Palestinian leadership, especially under Yasser Arafat and Hamas, have stoked the fires of hatred of Israelis which in turn validated fear within Israelis.  There is plenty of blame on all sides for the current state of affairs.

Which brings me to the current crisis.  Hamas committed a horrendous crime in their assault of Israelis on October 7.  This was not a military action, an action against the Israeli military.  The attack was clearly against defenseless people, especially women.  The crimes they committed could be compared with the crimes Russian troops committed against Germans when they occupied that country towards the end of WWII.  Except in the case of Hamas, the assault on unarmed people was the whole purpose of the action, not just an offshoot of an otherwise defensible military action.

So what was Israel expected to do in the aftermath of such an attack?  The only reasonable response is military and relentless.  

So far, I'm with Israel.  But because Netanyahu and his allies are who they are, they saw an opportunity to make war against the Palestinians in a way which they hadn't previously.  And so it has gone far beyond "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

Israel must stop and the region must return to what had passed as normalcy before the Hamas attack.

And what about all the protests, mainly by students, on behalf of the Palestinians?  Their self-righteousness is borne of ignorance.  They are totally one-sided in their thinking; they have no understanding of the history of the conflict;  nor do they seem to remember that this war started as a result of the Hamas action on October 7.  

Of course one should voice support for a cease-fire, an end to the war, but to denounce or demonize Israel as committing genocide is to fall into the trap set by Palestinian provocateurs and anti-semites, who do not come to this matter with "clean hands."

I have witnessed well-meaning liberal citizens marching down the street in small towns like Great Barrington, MA and Belfast, ME denouncing Israel.  They don't have a clue about  the conflict.  It is scary how people can be led to do things based on an "influencer" without any thought or research of their own, without any thought of the influencer's bias.

The reality of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that there is plenty of blame to go around, not just regarding the current conflict but the entire history since the founding of Israel.  No one can be self-righteous in this situation or conveniently point the finger of blame at the opponent/enemy.  

The time has come to return to the concept of the 2-state solution.  It will be much harder now than when it was first proposed because in the intervening years Israel has expanded its settlements in the West Bank making a reasonably functioning Palestinian state almost impossible to configure.  Thus, many settlements will have to be abandoned as part of the solution.

Many say that will be impossible; the settles will not move and it will cause a crisis in Israel.  But Ariel Sharon did it in Gaza, and a future Israeli government can do it in the West Bank.

Peace in the region depends on it.  There is no subjugating the wrath of an occupied and displaced people.