“America is great because she is good.
If America ceases to be good, America will
cease to be great,” wrote French political
scientist Alexis de Tocqueville in his 1835
book, “Democracy in America”.
The USA, he believed, offered equality that
was not seen in other nations.
The founding fathers of the U.S. had created
a form of ruling that was not able to be tyrannical,
that was chosen by the people and served the
people, and if it failed to do so it would
be removed.
This America was a long way from absolute
monarchies and from authoritarian government
presided over by powerful dictators.
It was supposed to embody what Thomas Jefferson
wrote in the U.S Declaration of Independence,
that, “all men are created equal.”
With that in mind, welcome to this episode
of the Infographics Show, Can a U.S. President
Go to Jail?
If all men are created equal, perhaps that
means that all men should be treated as equals
when it comes to matters of justice.
That’s why there are laws, and no people
in a democracy should be immune to punishment.
We could argue that the scales of justice
do seem to be tipped in favor of those that
have more money, to avoid close scrutiny by
law enforcement or to hire brilliant legal
teams to perhaps undo wrongdoings.
Notwithstanding the sometimes mindboggling
chicanery a very wealthy person might employ
to get them out of trouble, everyone in the
USA should be answerable to the same laws.
This must mean an American president can surely
go to jail, or prison.
Just so you know, jail and prison are sometimes
interchangeable words, but in the USA, jail
is usually the place you go to for a short
stint before you have a court hearing or you’re
just serving a very short sentence.
Prison is the place you go to after you’ve
been convicted of a crime.
Ok, so first of all, a “What If” question.
What if a U.S. President lost his mind and
ran out of the White House stark naked and
then started plunging a recently-procured
White House kitchen knife into astounded tourists?
Could that President be charged and convicted
of a number of crimes, say, attempted murder,
murder, and perhaps public indecency.
It’s not all that simple.
When the writers of the constitution drafted
their timeless piece, they had to think of
what would happen if a president went off
the rails and committed a crime, or crimes.
Such wrongdoing, they said, might be “Treason,
Bribery, or other High Crimes and misdemeanors.”
If that should happen, they said, first there
would be impeachment by the House of Representatives
and then it would be up to the Senate to convict
the wrongdoer.
What this could mean is while the president
is still in power, he can’t be indicted,
meaning the cops couldn’t just turn up outside
the White House, taser the wayward leader,
and detain him in one the city’s finest
jails until he had his day in court.
He first would have to be impeached and then
removed from office.
That would take some time.
After he has been removed, according to the
constitution, he, or she, will “be liable
and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment
and Punishment, according to Law.”
But it is complicated.
If we look at the crime we described, it is
perhaps too unbelievable to even discuss.
But would he be prosecuted if it happened?
One professor at Yale wrote this, “The framers
implicitly immunized a sitting president from
ordinary criminal prosecution.”
So again, he would have to be impeached first.
We don’t really know what would happen in
this case; perhaps an assumed enemy would
be blamed for somehow being able to control
the mind of the president.
We can safely say the President would be removed
from active duties, although somewhere along
the proceedings the public would be told something
nefarious had happened.
He’d probably be judged insane as a result
of dark outside influences.
We really don’t know, and unfortunately
no sources online have discussed the possibility
of such a heinous crime.
But this is an extreme case, so let’s look
at something more down-to-Earth.
If we look at what was called high crime,
that’s different.
High crimes are usually things like perjury,
bribery, abuse of power.
These things we certainly can imagine a president
doing.
According to U.S. legal scholar, Ronald Rotunda,
if the President committed one of these high
crimes, he’d face the law.
Rotunda wrote, while investigating former
President Clinton, “It is proper, constitutional,
and legal for a federal grand jury to indict
a sitting president for serious criminal acts
that are not part of, and are contrary to,
the president's official duties.
In this country, no one, even President Clinton,
is above the law.”
Still, others disagree.
Time magazine in 2018 featured a story written
by the former principal lawyer for Vice President
Spiro Agnew.
He wrote, “An imperial Presidency was the
worst fear of the Founders.”
As we said, the founders knew tyranny was
always bound to happen when one person, or
group, had too much power and attendant impunity.
The constitution had to preclude that this
tyranny, or corruption, never could happen.
The writer states again that first the president
would have to be impeached, then removed,
and he would then possibly face prison.
It’s just never happened.
The Atlantic also wrote a story in 2018, asking
if a sitting president could be indicted.
That writer said there was no clear answer.
He decided to ask the question to six well-known
legal scholars, regarding if a sitting president
could be indicted.
Four answered.
Three said no and one said yes.
The writer turned to academics, and many answers
came back, some saying that indicting a president
would just be too disruptive.
Another disagreed, saying the constitution
was written so that such a disruption, when
needed, could occur.
Another said that no expert can answer the
question, stating that one could only have
an opinion on this matter.
There is no airtight legal framework that
can guarantee an answer.
We apologize that we can’t ascertain a clear
answer to the question in this show, but it
seems there is nobody out there who knows.
The constitution was written so that a president
could face the law as you and I do, but while
in office it would seem that indicting a president
would be very hard to do.
That seems wrong to some, because if the founders
had wanted to give immunity to presidents,
that would have explicitly been written into
the constitution.
Perhaps the constitution should have some
small print where it says, “All men are
created equal.”
In that small print we can read, “Subject
to change without notice.
Not applicable outside of warranty.”
Is that too cynical?
What do you think about all this?
Tell us in the comments.
Also, be sure to check out our other show
The President's Escape Plan If The US Is Attacked.
Thanks for watching, and as always, don’t
forget to like, share and subscribe.
See you next time.
