---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: 'DIPO ENIOLA' via AfricanWorldForum <africanworldforum@googlegroups.com>
Date: 1 February 2017 at 17:51
Subject: [africanworldforum] Sally Yates was wrong and should have resigned By Alan M. Dershowitz, opinion contributor
To: Politics Naija <naijapolitics@yahoogroups.com>
1. Sally Yates is bound by the US law to give an independent opinion to the President and avoid carrying out an unconstitutional directive .
From: 'DIPO ENIOLA' via AfricanWorldForum <africanworldforum@googlegroups.com>
Date: 1 February 2017 at 17:51
Subject: [africanworldforum] Sally Yates was wrong and should have resigned By Alan M. Dershowitz, opinion contributor
To: Politics Naija <naijapolitics@yahoogroups.com>
Sally Yates was wrong and should have resigned
By Alan M. Dershowitz, opinion contributor - 01/31/17 10:51 AM EST
Sally Yates is neither a hero, nor a villain. She made an honest mistake when she instructed the entire Justice Department not to defend President Trump's wrong-headed executive order on immigration. The reasons she gave in her letter referred to matters beyond the scope of the attorney general. She criticized the order on policy grounds and said that it was not "right."
She also referred to its possibly being unconstitutional and unlawful. Had she stuck to the latter two criteria she would have been on more solid ground, although perhaps wrong on the merits. But by interjecting issues of policy and directing the Justice Department not to defend any aspect of the order, she overstepped her bounds.
An attorney general, like any citizen, has the right to disagree with a presidential order, but unless it is clear that the order is unlawful, she has no authority to order the Justice Department to refuse to enforce it. This order is multifaceted and complex. It raises serious constitutional and legal issues that deserved nuanced and calibrated consideration from the nation's highest law officer.There are significant differences between the constitutional status of green card holders on the one hand, and potential visitors from another country who are seeking visas. Moreover, there are statutory issues in addition to constitutional ones. A blanket order to refuse to defend any part of the statute is overkill. If she strongly disagreed with the policies underlying the order, she should have resigned in protest, and left it to others within the Justice Department to defend those parts of the order that are legally defensible.
I, too, disagree, with the policy underlying the order, but I don't immediately assume that any policy with which I disagree is automatically unconstitutional or unlawful.
The president has considerable constitutional authority to control entry into the United States by non-citizens and non-residents. Congress, too, has some degree of control over our borders. The precise relationship between presidential and congressional power has never been defined by the Supreme Court. A responsible attorney general would seek to analyze these complex issues before jumping into the political fire with a blanket refusal to defend any part of the order.
In addition to failing to do her duty as attorney general, Sally Yates handed President Trump an underserved political victory. She gave him the power to control the situation by firing her, instead of herself maintaining control by resigning in protest. It is the president who emerges from this unnecessary confrontation with the undeserved status of hero among his constituents.
I do not know Sally Yates except by reputation. She is highly regarded as a career prosecutor and public servant. My criticism of her is not personal, but rather institutional. These are dangerous and delicate times, and anyone who wants to confront the newly elected president must do so with wisdom, nuance and calibration. She played directly into his hands by responding to an overbroad order with overbroad response.
President Trump has now appointed a new acting attorney general who will defend the order, or at least those parts of it that are legally defensible. Any individual Justice Department official who feels uncomfortable defending this controversial order should be given the freedom by the department to decline to participate in the case.
There are plenty of good lawyers in the department who would have no hesitation standing up in the courtroom and making the best ethically permissible argument in defense of the order. I have had many experiences with Justice Department lawyers who personally disagreed with the prosecutorial decision in particular cases, but who vigorously defended the government's position.
Sally Yates did what she thought was right. In my view she was wrong. She should neither be lionized nor accused of betrayal. Nor should President Trump's critics, and I include myself among them, accuse him of doing anything even remotely close to President Nixon's infamous "Saturday Night Massacre." Nixon fired the very officials who were seeking to prosecute him. That constituted a personal and unethical conflict of interest. President Trump fired Yates over policy differences. It may have been unwise for him to do so, but it was clearly within his authority.
Now we will see our adversarial system at work. Excellent and dedicated lawyers will continue to bring challenges throughout the country against this ill-advised executive order. Other excellent lawyers will defend the order vigorously in court. Ultimately the issue may come to the Supreme Court, with or without a full complement of justices. That is the way our system of checks and balances is supposed to work.
Alan M. Dershowitz is professor emeritus at the Harvard Law School and author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and "Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for Unaroused Voters."
Responses
1. Sally Yates is bound by the US law to give an independent opinion to the President and avoid carrying out an unconstitutional directive .
" The unconstitutional directive involves the discrimination of someone or a group of people base on religion.
e,michaels
atlga2. It is a political jackpot.
She calculated rightly.
She's going anyway after Sessions confirmation.
What she did was a political masterstroke!
Trump should have waited for Sessions confirmation to go thru.
Now he looks like a real dictator taking after Nixon.
Shikena
Afis3. Bloomberg News on Sally Yates.....like I stated, this woman was unknown. Now she is all that is Righteous. Sally Yates is now the "Woman of Integrity", who stood up against a village bully, a misogynistic pussy grabber who hates women. What a political jackpot. Brilliant Move!
@@@
America's Top Prosecutor Defied Trump and Got Fired. Now She Gets Paid - Bloomberg
America's Top Prosecutor Defied Trump and Got Fired. Now She Gets Paid.
"A few days before the end of her tenure, Sally Yates, the acting U.S. attorney general, was fired by President Donald Trump for refusing to defend the Republican's executive order blocking refugees, deeming it unlawful.
In some industries, such a high profile swan song would turn anyone into a toxic commodity. But in the legal world, the actions of the seasoned federal prosecutor haven't changed her job prospects very much. They remain very good, and in some quarters, maybe a bit better.
Given her role at the top of the Justice Department, Yates, 56, would have had her pick of law firms, in house counsel, teaching, or non-profit jobs regardless. While some law firms may shy away from hiring her for fear of offending Trump, more are likely to be ambivalent about the dramatic finale, or view it as a badge of honor.
"She has an excellent reputation and I continue to believe that people will be very interested in her," said Jeffrey A. Lowe, a partner in the Washington office of legal recruiting firm Major, Lindsey & Africa. "People recognize that these are somewhat unusual times. She has such a tremendous track record people will focus on that." Lowe works with high profile clients (Yates would certainly qualify) who leave government jobs. Often those people tend to see their compensation skyrocket in the private sector, both because of their experience as litigators and their relationships......" Bloomberg.
@@@@@
Shikena
Afis
"Just as a solid rock is not shaken by the storm, even so the wise are not affected by praise or blame." — Dhamapada, verse 81Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment