Op-ed: Searching and seizing

  • By Cal Thomas
  • Sunday, April 15, 2018 10:02am
  • Opinion

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

— Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

No one ever accused Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz of being a conservative, but Dershowitz is a rare breed these days; someone who applies the Constitution and the law to everyone, regardless of their political leanings.

In the matter of the FBI raid on the law office of President Trump’s attorney, Michael Cohen, Dershowitz has said: “(It is) a dangerous day for lawyer-client relations.”

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Dershowitz noted that federal agents confiscated an unknown number of documents and items from Cohen’s office, home and hotel room and speculated they might include confidential papers pertaining to attorney-client discussions with the president about the $130,000 payout to porn star Stormy Daniels and the $150,000 payout to Karen McDougal, who claimed to have had yearlong affair with Trump.

Raising the issue of double standards when it comes to investigations into the behavior of Republicans vs. Democrats, Dershowitz said on Fox News and other media outlets: “If this were Hillary Clinton (having her lawyer’s office raided), the ACLU would be on every TV station in America jumping up and down. The deafening silence of the ACLU and civil libertarians about the intrusion into the lawyer-client confidentiality is really appalling.”

Being appalled isn’t what it used to be in the face of government intrusions through wiretaps and the exposure of personal data in many social media accounts, most notably Facebook.

What President Trump’s lawyers should do is demand that a judge require all of the documents and items seized in the raid be turned over to a court for examination as to which are relevant to an investigation and which violate attorney-client privilege.

On Monday, when asked by a reporter if he intends to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who’s currently spearheading the FBI’s investigation into possible Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election, Trump responded, “We’ll see what happens.” He again criticized Attorney General Jeff Sessions for recusing himself from the investigation. Sessions’ recusal led us to Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, who personally approved the FBI’s raid. Rosenstein then named former FBI director Robert Mueller to the investigatory team, a team that reportedly includes three members who have donated to Democratic presidential campaigns. Does this smack of partisan politics? It certainly smacks of partisan overreach.

The point about individual rights, including the right to privacy, is that they must be equally applied. You can’t deny those rights when it suits your political goals and apply those same rights when they don’t. If the government can sweep up every document in Michael Cohen’s possession, whether they are relevant to an investigation or not, simply because they have it in for those on the right, we are all potentially in jeopardy.

The president has the right to dismiss Mueller for exceeding his original mandate. The question, however, is not whether he has the right, but what the political cost would be. Just as Dershowitz noted the silence from the left and the ACLU, to which I will add major newspaper editorials and Democratic politicians, is deafening. You don’t have to be a psychic to know they would all express outrage if Mueller was fired.

With so much riding on the mid-term elections, including possible articles of impeachment against the president should Democrats win a House majority, whether to fire Mueller is a huge decision for the president and his lawyers to make, a decision with serious political consequences.

Of even greater importance than the fate of one president is the future of individual citizens and their right to be protected from an increasingly intrusive federal government.

Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribpub.com.

More in Opinion

Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R-Alaska) speaks to reporters about his decision to veto an education funding bill at the Alaska State Capitol on Thursday, April 17, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: The fight for Alaska’s future begins in the classroom

The fight I’ve been leading isn’t about politics — it’s about priorities.

Dick Maitland, a foley artist, works on the 46th season of “Sesame Street” at Kaufman Astoria Studios in New York, Dec. 15, 2025. (Ariana McLaughlin/The New York Times)
Opinion: Trump’s embarrassing immaturity Republicans won’t acknowledge

Sullivan should be embarrassed by the ignorance and immaturity the president is putting on display for the world to see.

Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, speaks in support of debating an omnibus education bill in the Alaska House Chambers on Monday, Feb. 19, 2024 in Juneau, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Capitol Corner: Choosing our priorities wisely

Rep. Justin Ruffridge reports back from Juneau.

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski, speaks in support overriding Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of House Bill 69 at the Alaska Capitol in Juneau, Alaska, on Tuesday, April 22, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini/Juneau Empire)
Capitol Corner: As session nears end, pace picks up in Juneau

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman reports back from Juneau.

Alaska Department of Education and Early Development Commissioner Deena Bishop and Gov. Mike Dunleavy discuss his veto of an education bill during a press conference March 15, 2024, at the Alaska State Capitol. (Mark Sabbatini/Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Strong policy, proven results

Why policy and funding go hand in hand.

Former Gov. Frank Murkowski speaks on a range of subjects during an interview with the Juneau Empire in May 2019. (Michael Penn / Juneau Empire File)
Opinion: The Jones Act — crass protectionism, but for whom?

Alaska is dependent on the few U.S.-built ships carrying supplies from Washington state to Alaska.

Cook Inlet can be seen at low tide from North Kenai Beach on June 15, 2022, in Kenai, Alaska. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Solving the Cook Inlet gas crisis

While importing LNG is necessary in the short term, the Kenai Peninsula is in dire need of a stable long-term solution.

Sockeye salmon caught in a set gillnet are dragged up onto the beach at a test site for selective harvest setnet gear in Kenai, Alaska, on Tuesday, July 25, 2023. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Capitol Corner: Creating opportunities with better fishery management

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman reports back from Juneau.

The ranked choice outcome for Alaska’s U.S. Senate race is shown during an Alaska Public Media broadcast on Nov. 24, 2022. (Alaska Division of Elections)
Opinion: Alaska should keep ranked choice voting, but let’s make it easier

RCV has given Alaskans a better way to express their preferences.

The Alaska State Capitol on March 1. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Keep Alaska open for business

Our job as lawmakers is to ensure that laws passed at the ballot box work effectively on the ground.

Image provided by the Office of Mayor Peter Micciche.
Opinion: Taxes, adequate education funding and putting something back into your pocket

Kenai Peninsula Borough taxpayers simply can’t make a dent in the education funding deficit by themselves, nor should they be asked to do so.

Brooke Walters. (Courtesy photo)
Opinion: A student’s letter to the governor

Our education funding is falling short by exuberant amounts.