Thank you, Timothy Snyder. I have been pushing “Ill Fares the Land,” connecting you with Tony Judt (I know the story from the NYRB). My daughter connected me to you with a Christmas present of “Blood Lands,” so I have followed you since. Sadly I cannot send money to your Ukraine fund having at 89, fallen from the middle class. My contribution to the current disaster is writing GOTV postcards, spending my second childhood reliving being the best printer in my first grade class! Wishing you, and all of US, a return to sanity.
What is astonishing is that after everything that has come to pass, republicans have refused an off-ramp from Trump’s highway to hell but only doubled down every time. What’s more shocking is that there’s still a chance, as outside as it may be that SCOTUS takes the immunity case on appeal and punts it to after the election.
I am waiting to see which 18th century slave owner Thomas cites to justify a decision in Trump's favor along with which 16th century witch burner Alito uses as his authoritative precedent. I have no doubt that the Leo/McConnell Cabal will rule that Trump, obvious insurrectionist if not abject traitor, is eligible to stay on the ballot. I am also not 100% convinced that they will find some way to give Trump at least some level of immunity.
The people who are most afraid of Trump and his MAGA minions at this point in our history are Republican elected officials and party members who have not supported him. Many have had to hire at great expense private security details. The other group that fear Trump are the cowardly elected officials who will swallow every lie and debase themselves to publicly support him in those lies. The rest of us do not fear him or his supporters now. If he is elected, I, for one, will truly fear him. I am accustomed to our democracy and its guarantee of freedom of speech. Trump has said that he will go after anyone who speaks out against him and has promised to weaponize the justice department to do so. The Supreme Court could relieve us of that fear by obeying the Constitution.
Great piece. By the way, Akhil Reed Amar has an oped in the NYT saying that each state should be able to decide whether to place an insurrectionist on their ballot, because federalism. Somehow I don't think the framers of the 14th amendment would have been ok with some states keeping Jeff Davis on the ballot.
We are mostly familiar with the iconic image of “Justice” depicted as a blindfolded goddess. Fewer of us, however, are aware that most judicial oaths include a promise to render justice “without fear or favor.”
What appears to be a “boilerplate” phrase within a judicial swearing-in administered thousands of times a year across countless jurisdictions may become an individual’s defining moment of personal bravery.
When we think of bravery, we are unlikely to image someone sitting in flowing black robes, presiding with apparent authority within a staid courtroom. Yet, bravery may take place there, hundreds of times a day.
Federal Judge James H. Wilkerson is hardly a household name today, but Al Capone is. In 1931 Judge Wilkerson found himself in a courthouse in Chicago, a city that many considered “owned” by Capone through actual or perceived violence and corruption. Wilkerson was about to hear a somewhat novel tax case against Capone, who was the ultimate progenitor of an estimated five-hundred homicides in that immediate past decade without an indictment against him. Some of the victims were Capone’s criminal rivals, while others were informants, witnesses and even law enforcement personnel.
In June of that year, the U.S. Attorney, who was preparing a strong tax-evasion case against Capone, came to fear for the lives of potential witnesses. He decided to offer Capone a plea deal of two and one-half years for Capone’s tax transgressions, which the wily Capone accepted. However, when Capone appeared in court to make his plea official, Wilkerson rejected the deal, saying, “It is time for somebody to impress upon the defendant that it is utterly impossible to bargain with a Federal Court.” Capone with plenty of resources for legal representation (and extralegal exploits) pleaded not guilty, and a trial was scheduled for October.
About two weeks before the trial, a Federal undercover investigator was told through an informant (who was later murdered) that Capone’s organization had received a complete list of the names and addresses of the jurors assigned to the tax case and that Capone’s organization was already “passing out $1,000 bills,” and “using muscle too.” When the undercover agent secured the list containing the names of the scheduled jurors, he brought it immediately to Judge Wilkerson, who had yet to receive the jury list himself but, when he did, he found every name on the informant’s list was on the list of jurors the Judge was handed by the court.
Judge Wilkerson then played his hand with skill and courage to defeat a system designed to wreck injustice upon this case, which by then had a nation transfixed. He told only the prosecution to “Bring your case into court as planned, gentlemen.” They did so on October 5, 1931.
As a confident Capone, his lawyers and cronies entered the courtroom with its selected jurors already seated, Judge Wilkerson called the bailiff to the bench and directed him as follows, “Judge Edwards has another trial commencing today. Go to his courtroom and bring me his entire panel of jurors, take my entire panel to Judge Edwards.” Consequently, Capone was convicted and sentenced to over eleven years in prison by the impartial jury.
Judge Wilkerson had administered justice as only we could have hoped and as we can appreciate all the more greatly now: “Without Fear or Favor,” a judicial doctrine for the ages, a doctrine of a democratic republic.
Peter Mancuso, BA-MA - Criminal Justice, formerly Asst. Dir. of Training NYPD. New Hope, PA. Thanking Professor Douglas H. Linder; UMKC; “Famous Trials;” 1995, for his account of this case from contemporary sources.
I think it is more likely that the Supreme Court will say the January 6 affair was not an insurrection or they will say that Trump was not involved in the planning of it I do not think they will buy the idea that a President is not an officer of the United States
“Fear is an instructor of great sagacity and the herald of revolutions. One thing he teaches, that there is rottenness where he appears.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Colorado has disqualified citizen Trump under this provision. What about Rep Boebert? Are insurrectionist representatives of either House also disqualified? I most interested in the Rep who cannot spell ‘Martial’ in his texts to the White House.
Thanks Dr. Snyder, your explanation of “anticipatory obedience” encapsulates not only describes the reasoning behind the many lawyers who posit that keeping DJT on the ballot is necessary, it also is the key to why so many elected officials, at both the federal and local levels, are allowing DJT to influence their voting on bills before their legislatures. I’m tired of media platforms trying to psychoanalize MAGA followers. Instead both Biden and all media platforms should and could be covering the magnitude of the thuggish threats of violence DJT uses to reinforce the “anticipatory obedience” that is so key to his control of the MAGA sycophants in office.
I believe the article by Baude/Paulsen, two highly respected members of the Federalist Society, was an signal to those justices who owe their presence on the Supreme Court to the Federalist Society that they may nix Trump's candidacy; it will only take one of the three justices to do so.
I read Trump's response to the the Respondents' superb filing and boil down his response as follows: I just won by a landslide the Iowa caucus and so you can not remove the leading candidate from the ballot.
Finally, I do hope Trump appeals the ruling against him in the immunity case. The timing could not be more perfect. As the Appeals Court affirmed, "Former President Trump's alleged efforts to remain in power despite losing the 2020 election were, if proven*, an unprecedented assault on the structure of our government. He allegedly injected himself into a process in which the President no role - the counting and certifying of the Electoral College votes thereby undermining constitutionally established procedures and the will of the Congress."
*The Appeals Court failed to recognize that the Colorado District and Supreme Court both ruled that Trump engaged in insurrection.
Thank you, Timothy Snyder. I have been pushing “Ill Fares the Land,” connecting you with Tony Judt (I know the story from the NYRB). My daughter connected me to you with a Christmas present of “Blood Lands,” so I have followed you since. Sadly I cannot send money to your Ukraine fund having at 89, fallen from the middle class. My contribution to the current disaster is writing GOTV postcards, spending my second childhood reliving being the best printer in my first grade class! Wishing you, and all of US, a return to sanity.
"If we give in to fear again and again, law will eventually yield." If that doesn't create fear in all Americans, then nothing will.
What is astonishing is that after everything that has come to pass, republicans have refused an off-ramp from Trump’s highway to hell but only doubled down every time. What’s more shocking is that there’s still a chance, as outside as it may be that SCOTUS takes the immunity case on appeal and punts it to after the election.
Thank you Dr. Snyder. On point as always.
I am waiting to see which 18th century slave owner Thomas cites to justify a decision in Trump's favor along with which 16th century witch burner Alito uses as his authoritative precedent. I have no doubt that the Leo/McConnell Cabal will rule that Trump, obvious insurrectionist if not abject traitor, is eligible to stay on the ballot. I am also not 100% convinced that they will find some way to give Trump at least some level of immunity.
The people who are most afraid of Trump and his MAGA minions at this point in our history are Republican elected officials and party members who have not supported him. Many have had to hire at great expense private security details. The other group that fear Trump are the cowardly elected officials who will swallow every lie and debase themselves to publicly support him in those lies. The rest of us do not fear him or his supporters now. If he is elected, I, for one, will truly fear him. I am accustomed to our democracy and its guarantee of freedom of speech. Trump has said that he will go after anyone who speaks out against him and has promised to weaponize the justice department to do so. The Supreme Court could relieve us of that fear by obeying the Constitution.
Great piece. By the way, Akhil Reed Amar has an oped in the NYT saying that each state should be able to decide whether to place an insurrectionist on their ballot, because federalism. Somehow I don't think the framers of the 14th amendment would have been ok with some states keeping Jeff Davis on the ballot.
Thank you for this eloquence, TS.
A Judicial Promise
We are mostly familiar with the iconic image of “Justice” depicted as a blindfolded goddess. Fewer of us, however, are aware that most judicial oaths include a promise to render justice “without fear or favor.”
What appears to be a “boilerplate” phrase within a judicial swearing-in administered thousands of times a year across countless jurisdictions may become an individual’s defining moment of personal bravery.
When we think of bravery, we are unlikely to image someone sitting in flowing black robes, presiding with apparent authority within a staid courtroom. Yet, bravery may take place there, hundreds of times a day.
Federal Judge James H. Wilkerson is hardly a household name today, but Al Capone is. In 1931 Judge Wilkerson found himself in a courthouse in Chicago, a city that many considered “owned” by Capone through actual or perceived violence and corruption. Wilkerson was about to hear a somewhat novel tax case against Capone, who was the ultimate progenitor of an estimated five-hundred homicides in that immediate past decade without an indictment against him. Some of the victims were Capone’s criminal rivals, while others were informants, witnesses and even law enforcement personnel.
In June of that year, the U.S. Attorney, who was preparing a strong tax-evasion case against Capone, came to fear for the lives of potential witnesses. He decided to offer Capone a plea deal of two and one-half years for Capone’s tax transgressions, which the wily Capone accepted. However, when Capone appeared in court to make his plea official, Wilkerson rejected the deal, saying, “It is time for somebody to impress upon the defendant that it is utterly impossible to bargain with a Federal Court.” Capone with plenty of resources for legal representation (and extralegal exploits) pleaded not guilty, and a trial was scheduled for October.
About two weeks before the trial, a Federal undercover investigator was told through an informant (who was later murdered) that Capone’s organization had received a complete list of the names and addresses of the jurors assigned to the tax case and that Capone’s organization was already “passing out $1,000 bills,” and “using muscle too.” When the undercover agent secured the list containing the names of the scheduled jurors, he brought it immediately to Judge Wilkerson, who had yet to receive the jury list himself but, when he did, he found every name on the informant’s list was on the list of jurors the Judge was handed by the court.
Judge Wilkerson then played his hand with skill and courage to defeat a system designed to wreck injustice upon this case, which by then had a nation transfixed. He told only the prosecution to “Bring your case into court as planned, gentlemen.” They did so on October 5, 1931.
As a confident Capone, his lawyers and cronies entered the courtroom with its selected jurors already seated, Judge Wilkerson called the bailiff to the bench and directed him as follows, “Judge Edwards has another trial commencing today. Go to his courtroom and bring me his entire panel of jurors, take my entire panel to Judge Edwards.” Consequently, Capone was convicted and sentenced to over eleven years in prison by the impartial jury.
Judge Wilkerson had administered justice as only we could have hoped and as we can appreciate all the more greatly now: “Without Fear or Favor,” a judicial doctrine for the ages, a doctrine of a democratic republic.
Peter Mancuso, BA-MA - Criminal Justice, formerly Asst. Dir. of Training NYPD. New Hope, PA. Thanking Professor Douglas H. Linder; UMKC; “Famous Trials;” 1995, for his account of this case from contemporary sources.
I think it is more likely that the Supreme Court will say the January 6 affair was not an insurrection or they will say that Trump was not involved in the planning of it I do not think they will buy the idea that a President is not an officer of the United States
“Fear is an instructor of great sagacity and the herald of revolutions. One thing he teaches, that there is rottenness where he appears.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Colorado has disqualified citizen Trump under this provision. What about Rep Boebert? Are insurrectionist representatives of either House also disqualified? I most interested in the Rep who cannot spell ‘Martial’ in his texts to the White House.
Thanks Dr. Snyder, your explanation of “anticipatory obedience” encapsulates not only describes the reasoning behind the many lawyers who posit that keeping DJT on the ballot is necessary, it also is the key to why so many elected officials, at both the federal and local levels, are allowing DJT to influence their voting on bills before their legislatures. I’m tired of media platforms trying to psychoanalize MAGA followers. Instead both Biden and all media platforms should and could be covering the magnitude of the thuggish threats of violence DJT uses to reinforce the “anticipatory obedience” that is so key to his control of the MAGA sycophants in office.
Excellent thank you. Extremely clear
Once again, a very well- and clearly-written article.
Professor Snyder, you haven't told us what time live question time is tomorrow, or maybe I missed it? In your "Note to Paid Subscribers" of Jan. 14 you wrote, "As paid subscribers, you have access to the entire archive of "Thinking about..." as well as occasional live threads with me (the next one will be February 8th)," but no time was given as it was the year before. https://snyder.substack.com/p/note-to-subscribers-e4a?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=310897&post_id=140680386&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=106pt&utm_medium=email
Last year the time was 11am ET, but oral args start tomorrow at 10am ET: "For Trump v. Anderson, the audio stream will start on Thursday, Feb. 8, at 10 a.m. ET. Arguments are scheduled to last at least 80 minutes." https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/how-to-listen-to-donald-trumps-14th-amendment-case-at-the-supreme-court
I fear what Trump may do in the White House if he wins, not the GQP MAGA cowards. 😀 #BiggestLosers!
I believe the article by Baude/Paulsen, two highly respected members of the Federalist Society, was an signal to those justices who owe their presence on the Supreme Court to the Federalist Society that they may nix Trump's candidacy; it will only take one of the three justices to do so.
I read Trump's response to the the Respondents' superb filing and boil down his response as follows: I just won by a landslide the Iowa caucus and so you can not remove the leading candidate from the ballot.
Finally, I do hope Trump appeals the ruling against him in the immunity case. The timing could not be more perfect. As the Appeals Court affirmed, "Former President Trump's alleged efforts to remain in power despite losing the 2020 election were, if proven*, an unprecedented assault on the structure of our government. He allegedly injected himself into a process in which the President no role - the counting and certifying of the Electoral College votes thereby undermining constitutionally established procedures and the will of the Congress."
*The Appeals Court failed to recognize that the Colorado District and Supreme Court both ruled that Trump engaged in insurrection.