Is Alvin Bragg’s Case Against Donald Trump a Historic Mistake?

Trending Polls:

• Do You Support Cancel Culture?

• Should Criminals Be Allowed to Hold Office?

• Are You In Favor of DEI?

• Should the Government Ban TikTok?

• Do You Prefer Shopping at Costco Over Trader Joe's?

Here’s the Scoop

The Manhattan District Attorney’s case against former President Donald Trump may be a historic blunder, as per Boston University law professor Jed Handelsman Shugerman. In a scathing New York Times guest essay, Shugerman derided the case as a legal farce, with baseless arguments and a thin premise at best.

Shugerman has expressed deep concerns over the prosecutors’ unprecedented use of state law and their evasion to specify a valid election crime or a plausible theory of fraud. These allegations, he argues, seem to be a desperate attempt to fit a federal case within state jurisdiction.

The DA’s office has accused Trump of committing “election fraud” by attempting to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. However, Shugerman highlights an overlooked fact: it’s perfectly legal for a candidate to pay for a nondisclosure agreement. Labeling it as “election fraud” is a gross exaggeration, setting up a jury with expectations that the prosecutors will inevitably fail to deliver.

Shugerman concludes that this case seems to be more about Manhattan politics than New York law, eight years after the alleged crime. He warns this case could serve as a cautionary tale of broader prosecutorial abuses in America, urging for bipartisan reforms in our overly partisan prosecutorial system.

Is Alvin Bragg’s case against Donald Trump a historic mistake? The evidence, or rather the lack of it, suggests it might just be.

What do you think? Let us know by participating in our poll.