On Tuesday of this week, Former President Donald Trump found himself the target of yet another criminal case handed down from the Justice Department’s special counsel, Jack Smith. This time, for his alleged offenses in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
The Ends Justify the Means
Prior polls show that many Americans believe Trump’s indictments, this one and the two prior, have been politically motivated, but at the same time, justified. This means people support measures, even unjustified ones, to ruin any shot Trump has at returning to his former home at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, regardless of the law or the rationale for seeking prosecutory action against the former president.
In other words, the ends justify the means.
Not only is this a disturbing response to the bombastic frontrunner GOP candidate and politicians in general, but very dangerous to a democracy in which people are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
The reverse seems to be the case with anything related to Donald Trump.
It would be hard to assume the judge assigned to preside over Trump’s third indictment believes any differently.
Who Is Tanya Chutkan?
Washington D.C.’s U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, a former public defender, was appointed by the Obama administration in 2014. This alone does not make Chutkan untrustworthy to deliver a fair trial. She was senate confirmed by a 95-0 vote.
She has ruled against the former president in his 2021 attempt to keep White House papers secret from the congressional inquiry.
In a memorable line from that ruling, Chutkan wrote: “Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President.”
While a CNN op-ed offers a slew of reasons that Chutkan will preside over the case in good faith, it’s reasonable to doubt her impartiality.
The University of Pennsylvania trained judge handed down harsher than recommended punishments for a number of defendants in the January 6th trials. She ignored the Justice Department’s endorsed sentences, citing the necessity of consequences for taking part in the uprising.
“The judge they drew is obviously not a fan of what happened on Jan. 6,” said Douglas Berman, a professor of criminal law at the Ohio State University. “She’s not inclined to give people involved the benefit of the doubt.”
And if there’s anyone people are not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt, it’s Donald J. Trump.
Why Is the Judge Important?
Chutkan does not decide the verdict in the case – that will be the role of a jury of Trump’s so-called peers. Peers that all happen to reside in the very liberal, very Trump-opposed District of Columbia. Peers who reside in the city where the January 6th actions took place.
However, Chutkan will oversee a highly controversial hearing and have to make some difficult decisions about process. Like a referee, a judge can make a call that will decide who ultimately reigns victorious.
It’s almost as if the op-ed writers are preparing readers for the inevitability of a biased outcome.
“Regardless of outcome, large numbers of Americans will disagree with each of her decisions.”
Meaning, don’t be surprised when the massive blowback occurs if Chutkan allows litigation that is biased against Trump.
Trump’s Retort
The night before Trump arrived at the courthouse in Washington, D.C., Trump called for a change of venue for his trial.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump posited that his case could hopefully, “be moved to an impartial venue, such as the politically unbiased nearby state of West Virginia!”
“IMPOSSIBLE to get a fair trial in Washington, D.C, which is over 95% anti-Trump.”
For the sake of the state of our nation, let’s hope Tanya Chutkan doesn’t make good on Trump’s accusations.
Jennifer Galardi is the politics and culture editor and opinion writer for 19FortyFive.com. She has a Master’s in Public Policy from Pepperdine University and produces and hosts the podcast Connection with conversations that address health, culture, politics, and policy. In a previous life, she wrote for publications in the health, fitness, and nutrition space. In addition, her pieces have been published in the Epoch Times and Pepperdine Policy Review. You can follow her on Instagram and Twitter.
