Mueller’s raid on Trump’s lawyer may have gone over an important legal line


By Against Crony Capitalism

April 12, 2018

 

Mueller’s raid on Trump’s lawyer may have gone over an important legal line

 

Mueller’s raid on Trump’s lawyer may have gone over an important legal line

 

I know that in the eyes of some anything that will embarrass or “take down” President Trump is legitimate. It’s a 3rd World type of politics but some people have chosen to indulge in it in this country lately. However, Mr. Trump may have been correct when he characterized the FBI’s recent actions as an “attack on America.”

We are supposed to have the rule of law in this country and it is particularly unnerving that Mueller, who presumably knows the law, may have flaunted it on Monday.



(From The Washington Examiner)
 
So, let’s not dismiss the potential violation of the rights of Michael Cohen and his client, if it were to turn out that included among the materials seized by the government in the raid were private or confidential information or documents.
 
The recourses for intrusions on the Fourth and Sixth Amendments are multifold: the victim of the intrusion can sue for damages; he or she can exclude it from use by the government in criminal or civil cases; or the victim can demand the material back. But none of these remedies undo the harm to privacy and confidentiality done to the citizen by the government’s intrusion into his private and confidential affairs.
 
An equally important harm is to important relationships that are protected by the law: between lawyer and client, priest and penitent, doctor and patient, husband and wife, etc. If an ordinary citizen, seeing that even the president’s confidential communications with his lawyer can be seized and perused, he or she will be far less willing to engage in such communications. As a society, we value such communications; that is why our laws protect them and that is why it should be extremely difficult for the government to intrude upon them, except as a last recourse in extremely important cases.
 
From what we know, this case does not meet those stringent standards.

Click here for the article.


Copyright © 2018 Against Crony Capitalism.

Reprinted with permission from Against Crony Capitalism.