QQOTD: Alan Dershowitz
“It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the office of president and who abuses trust and who poses great danger to our liberty.” (1998)
“It is difficult to argue reasonably from the text [of the Constitution] that … a person can be impeached for anything less than a crime.” (2018)
Alan Dershowitz is an American lawyer and academic. He is a scholar of United States constitutional law and criminal law. He has also been described as a noted civil libertarian. He began his teaching career at Harvard Law School where, in 1967, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor of law in its history. He held the Felix Frankfurter professorship there from 1993 until his retirement in December 2013, and has been a regular media contributor, political commentator, and legal analyst. He is also a prominent voice on the Arab–Israeli conflict and has written a several books on the subject.
How might you explain Dershowitz’s differing viewpoints (1998 and 2018)? Why the discrepancy?
How can politics and money color a legal scholar’s point of view?
Which Alan Dershowitz is correct? Why?
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States:
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”