The hearing Wednesday in the House Judiciary Committee presented four constitutional experts pontificating on long lessons of history and politics, precedent and process. It should have been a good civics lesson for citizens. It sadly devolved into social media preening and petty politics from elected officials.
But there was one message that every member of Congress and every citizen should read, ponder and apply. Ironically, it had nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. It had everything to do with how we deal with those of whom we disagree with, dislike or even despise. (Of course, allowing yourself to get to the point you despise someone is most dangerous, but even if you’re in that zone, how you deal with that person matters.)
Jonathan Turley was the only witness Wednesday approved by the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee. He began by saying he wasn’t a Republican, he was not a supporter of the president and that he didn’t vote for President Trump. He also said that his feelings about the commander in chief are irrelevant to the discussion, process and pursuit of truth.
As Turley drew his opening remarks to close, he delivered this important message that should be read, and reread, in its entirety:
“In this age of rage, many are appealing for us to simply put the law aside and ‘just do it’ like this is some impulse-buy Nike sneaker. You can certainly do that. You can declare the definitions of crimes alleged are immaterial and this is an exercise of politics, not law. However, the legal definitions and standards that I have addressed in my testimony are the very thing dividing rage from reason.
“Listening to these calls to dispense with such legal niceties, brings to mind a famous scene with Sir Thomas More in ‘A Man For All Seasons.’ In a critical exchange, More is accused by his son-in-law William Roper of putting the law before morality and that More would ‘give the Devil the benefit of law!’ When More asks if Roper would instead ‘cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?,’ Roper proudly declares ‘Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!’ More responds by saying ‘And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!’”
Even if you despise this president, or any other president regardless of political party, or even if it is your neighbor or colleague or competitor you have come to despise — remember that everyone deserves the benefit of the law. Everyone deserves to be heard. Everyone deserves respect. No one deserves to be demonized. No one deserves to be marginalized. In preserving the rights of one we preserve the rights of all — even, and especially, those that may seem least deserving of such treatment.
In Turley’s final and stinging rebuke of the partisans he sat before, he said, “Both sides in this controversy have demonized the other to justify any measure in defense much like Roper. Perhaps that is the saddest part of all of this. We have forgotten the common article of faith that binds each of us to each other in our Constitution. However, before we cut down the trees so carefully planted by the Framers, I hope you consider what you will do when the wind blows again ... perhaps for a Democratic president. Where will you stand then ‘the laws all being flat?’”
No gain, no opponent you wish to take out, no victory in any area of endeavor is worth laying the laws of nation flat. The days ahead are certain to be filled with more divisive rhetoric. It is up to we the people to ensure we speak and stand in such a way that we can divide rage from reason.