Raskin uses analogies to destroy Trump’s defense of free speech

Representative Jamie Raskin presented powerful arguments on Wednesday during the Senate trial of former President Donald Trump.

Video transcription

REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: Incitement to violence, of course, is not protected by the First Amendment. That’s why most Americans rejected Donald Trump’s First Amendment rhetoric simply by referring to Judge Oliver Wendell Holmes’ useful phrase – “you can’t shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.” But even this time-honored principle does not begin to capture how erroneous the argument is. This case is much worse than someone who falsely shouts ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.

It’s more like a case where the city’s fire chief who gets paid to put out fires sends a crowd not to shout “fire” in a crowded theater, but to actually set the theater on fire. And who then, when fire alarms go off and calls begin to flood the fire department, asking for help, does nothing but sit back, encourage the crowd to continue their violence and watch the fire spread on TV with joy and delight. .

So we say, this fire chief should never be allowed to hold this public office again. And you are fired and permanently disqualified. And he opposes and says, we are violating his freedom of expression rights just because he is pro-mafia or pro-fire or whatever. Let’s go. I mean, you really don’t have to go to law school to find out what’s wrong with that argument. Here’s the key.

Undoubtedly, a private individual can run on the street expressing his support for the enemies of the United States and defending the overthrow of the United States government. You have the right to do this under the First Amendment. But if the president has spent all his days doing this, saying exactly the same words, expressing support for the enemies of the United States and for the overthrow of the government, there is someone here who doubts that it would be a violation of his oath to preserve, protect and defend the United States Constitution?

And that he or she can be accused of doing this. See, if you are the President of the United States, you chose to side with your oath. And if you break it, we can impeach, condemn, remove and permanently disqualify any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. As Judge Scalia once said in a memorable way, “you cannot walk with the police and cheer for the thieves”.

And if you become the chief investigator of the insurrection, you cannot expect to be on the payroll as the union’s chief commander. Trump was the President of the United States and had vowed to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. He had an affirmative binding duty, which set him apart from everyone else in the country, to see that the laws were faithfully enforced, including all laws against assaulting federal officials, destruction of federal property, violent threats to members of Congress and the Vice President, interfering in federal elections and dozens of other federal laws that are well known to all of you.

When he incited the uprising on January 6, he broke that oath. He violated that duty. And that is why we are here today. And that is why he has no reliable constitutional defense.

Source