Donald Trump’s trial, handling of campus protests show double standards of American rhetoric on democracy

The New York Supreme Court has convicted former US President Donald Trump of falsifying his business records. The court may sentence him to three years of imprisonment or more on July 11. Trump allegedly did that to pay hush money to a porn star named Stormy Daniels. Even though the payment of ‘hush money’ is not an illegal act under the American legal system, the falsification of business records is a crime.

As expected, Trump was quick to cry foul, dub the court decision “rigged”, and blame the Biden administration for staging a conspiracy against him. Had it not been the presidential election year and had Trump not been the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, the popular perception of the court decision and its general implications would have been different.

More from Opinion

Sergio Gor’s senate hearing signals the future of Indo-American ties How Trump’s ‘War on Drugs’ buildup against Venezuela has a hidden agenda

The US, however, is currently facing one of the worst political phases in its history. As Trump plays victim, his support base rises up in arms, and polarisation deepens.

Politics, in a way, is perceptual, and how American voters perceive the outcome of legal cases against Trump will surely influence the election results as well. A large number of Republican voters, including the senior leaders of the party, apparently believe that Trump is innocent. Had it not been so, his scores in the opinion polls would have been disastrous for him. His core base of supporters has turned more ferocious in their responses.

Ordinary Republican voters would continue to support Trump because they do not like President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party. On the other hand, the Democratic Party has found yet another major culpability of Trump to toughen their campaigns against him.

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

How army remains Pakistan’s biggest business house

60 years on, why 1965 India–Pakistan war still matters

What is going to matter most is the perception of independent voters in swing states, which will determine who will become the next occupant of the White House. While the life, behaviour, social background, and character of a candidate during American elections become part of the election campaigns, how far the voting behaviour of American citizens is shaped by moral and ethical issues is not easy to measure.

In any case, the Republican Party is not in a position to change the nominee at this late stage of the campaign. Those who traditionally vote for the Democratic Party will almost certainly vote for Joe Biden, even if they question the age factor or performance of the administration, because the alternative may be considered shoddier on ethical grounds.

The challenge the American political system faces today is not whether a Democrat or a Republican will win the 2024 presidential election. The US is faced with a multitude of legal dilemmas in the wake of multiple court cases—some decided, many in the process—against a former president and a presumptive presidential candidate.

The US Constitution was drafted centuries ago. It has been sustained with a few amendments compared to other democratic constitutions. But this constitution says very little about who can contest the presidential election. Its provisions say that any natural-born American citizen of 35 years of age who has lived in the US continuously for 14 years is eligible to enter the presidential race. And that is all. It is silent on the disqualification of a presidential contestant.

As a result, speculations are myriad in the US about future political scenarios and whether Donald Trump, who has lost a few cases, both civilian and criminal, in the midst of the election, should be allowed to stay in the race. Since the US Constitution and the legal provisions are silent, Trump can run for the presidency, even from prison, and there is a precedent. But if he wins the election, how can he run the administration from prison?

As a former president, he is eligible for security services. Can he avail of that while in prison? As president, he has the power to pardon, but can he pardon himself and move to the White House? Neither the legal provisions nor the precedence can help the US courts in the present scenario. Thus, US policy is faced with both political ambiguities and legal uncertainties.

These developments in the US in the midst of wars in Europe and West Asia and war-like situations in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea are unnerving. The US claims that it fights against enemies of democracies, but American democracy seems to be groping in darkness.

A former president believes strongly that the 2020 presidential election was stolen and complains that the court cases are “rigged” in the US, coupled with the campaign language and rhetoric that are unbecoming in a democracy, and the US seems to be facing one of the most embarrassing moments in its history.

Successive American administrations swear upon freedom, liberty, the rule of law, human rights, and above all, democratic values. Some administrations sought to “promote democracy” abroad. The current Biden Administration organised a global meet on democracy, accused many countries, including India, of practices that indicate “backsliding of democracy”, publicly made critical comments on farmers’ agitation in India and CAA-related demonstrations, harboured anti-India separatist elements in its territory, and defined “free speech” in its own way to blame other countries.

What is happening today in the US to “free speech”? The world is watching the Biden administration’s approach to the Gaza war and its handling of free speech issues on numerous college campuses in various parts of the world. Clearly, the soft power that made the US proud appears to have entered the danger zone. The future administrations in the US need to react or respond to events in other democracies, including India, in more sophisticated, measured, and understanding ways. This can happen only when the American leadership does some soul-searching on what is happening within the US. The fallout of the legal cases against Trump is domestic uncertainty for sure, but its implications for world affairs are no less.

The writer is founder chairperson of Kalinga Institute Indo-Pacific Studies and former Professor at JNU. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.