The Federalist
•60% Informative
Special Counsel John Durham highlighted difficulty of obtaining conviction in a politically charged case when the jury holds opposing partisan views.
He merely stated the reality on the ground in D.C.-area federal courts in the nation’s capital.
John Avlon: By his own actions, Attorney General Merrick Garland has confirmed that.
Avlon says it isn't Durham's words that erode trust in the legal system, but insular juries.
Federal D.C. district court has denied a change of venue requests, even against evidence that 90 percent of voters cast their ballots against Trump in both 2016 and 2020.
The courts and Congress can and should respond, says Julian Zelizer.
Zelizer: The attorney general ignoring the public perception of Lady Justice peaking from behind her blindfold will further erode respect for the judicial system.
But that’s the reality that comes from a constitutional system that protects individual rights against government abuse and believes “that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” That’s a good thing, especially as the current DOJ frames pro-lifers and parents as domestic terrorists. But that doesn’t mean it’s a bad thing to remind Americans that juries may not convict because of strongly held political passions rather than actual innocence. Nor is it a bad thing to push Congress to ensure the venue statutes counter bias to the largest extent possible..
VR Score
71
Informative language
79
Neutral language
40
Article tone
formal
Language
English
Language complexity
67
Offensive language
possibly offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
no external sources
Source diversity
no sources
Affiliate links
no affiliate links