Wanted: Presidential candidate who understands legal concepts before speaking on them

The majority of U.S. citizens never come in contact with the legal system. It follows that an overwhelming part of the population learns about the subject from the only authoritative source that they know: television. For example, Law and Order provides a great way to get a comprehensive history of how law proceedings are portrayed on TV. However, the show is an extremely skewed view of how the justice system actually works.

Candidates for president of the United States have access to far more accurate knowledge. And yet, looking at the ridiculous statements that have come out of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns, it’s tempting to think that they are no more knowledgeable about the laws that, in January of next year, one of them will swear to uphold, than an average citizen.

Trump on non-citizens being able to vote when there is same-day voter registration:
“You have to be a citizen to vote,” but with same-day voter registration, “you have places where people just walk in and vote.”

According to the law, you have to register and to do that you have to provide ID that is required by the state. Although non-citizens are allowed to vote in certain local elections, only United States citizens are allowed to vote in federal elections.

On Syrian immigration:
“… our president wants to take in 250,000 from Syria.”

The current administration plans to increase the quota of the total number of refugees allowed into the United States to rise from 70,000 to 100,000 by 2017. That’s from all nations. As of 2015, the U.S. immigration system had processed about 1,800 Syrian refugees.

On libel:
“the New York Times can write a story that they know is false yet they can’t basically be sued.”

A plaintiff can sue if the published material contains false or defamatory content.

On birthright citizenship in Mexico:
“And by the way, Mexico and almost every other country anywhere in the world doesn’t have that,” he said. “We’re the only ones dumb enough, stupid enough to have it.”

Mexico and 33 other countries have birthright citizenship.

Not exactly encouraging. Especially when you rack up all of the other blatantly false statements he has made about statistics, political records of competitors, the list goes on and on.

What about Hillary Clinton? Surely someone with as much political experience coupled with personal experience with the justice system would give her an edge over Trump, wouldn’t it? Not so much. Seems like she is also prone to shooting from the hip and nicking her foot.

Regarding keeping a personal email server:
“It was allowed,” referring to her email practices.

The fact is that it was over looked. And not just for Clinton. 90 other members of the government have used personal email servers but it was overlooked. Specifically, the government issued this guideline for personal email systems:

Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.

Clinton’s email server was never configured to preserve it’s output in an appropriate agency recordkeeping system. Nor was it secured by an approved governmental agency and might have been compromised. The latest here: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/clinton-email-storm/

Related to gun control:
“…the gun industry is “the only business in America that is wholly protected from any kind of liability.”

Although there are laws protecting gun manufacturers from liability in certain circumstances, other laws clearly state that a gun manufacturer can face legal consequences under other specific circumstances.

On drug laws and research:
“I want to move marijuana off of Schedule I, which you understand means that you can’t do any research about it.”

Although not easy, research into cannabinoids is possible and legal. The National Institutes of Health has ongoing research in effects and uses of marijuana.

Numerous other statements have called into question how prepared either candidate is to be commander in chief. Indeed, if anyone cares to look back over the years, it seems that this is a recurring theme among candidates for political office of all kinds. Granted, no one person can know everything about every single aspect of running the country. Still, having seen some of these blatantly ignorant proclamations by our current major party candidates, one wonders how badly our election system and even the people choosing their future leader have failed.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *