Trump Should Be Treated Like 'Any Other Criminal Defender,' Says Legal Expert Who Urges Judiciary To Take Ex-President 'Head On'

Donald Trump’s intransigence despite his multiple legal challenges and the way he goes after the judiciary and court staff came under severe criticism from a legal expert.

What Happened: The judiciary has largely failed, said Democratic Party elections lawyer Marc Elias, as he commented on Trump getting away with intimidating the judges, prosecutors, clerks, and other court staff and witnesses. The legal expert made the comments in the “Democracy Watch” podcast that was aired on Thursday.

Elias also raised the question of whether Trump would be let off if he were a Black 20-year-old picked up by the police on some petty offense and he tweeted one-hundredth of what the ex-president tweets. The former president is not being treated like any other American citizen or like any other criminal defendant, he said.

“He is making a mockery of it,” Elias said. “And the fact is, it is time for the federal judiciary and the state judiciary to take this head on and stop it,” he added.

“And it is about time that the bar crackdown on these frivolous arguments that lawyers are making but it’s time that the judges also stop bending over backwards and start treating Donald Trump like any other criminal defender,” the lawyer said.

See Also: Trump’s Lead Over Biden Surges In Latest Poll: Political Analyst Shrugs Off The Number But Highlights A Scary Prospect

Judge Stumbled? Elias also delved into the Denver District Court Judge Sarah Wallace’s ruling that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply to presidents.

“I think the judge stumbled,” he said. The conclusion of every serious constitutional scholar and lawyer is that the 14th Amendment applies to presidents, he added.

It is heartening that the judge found that Trump engaged in acts that violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, Elias said. The legal expert, however, found it baffling that the judge got held up over the text of the 14th Amendment regarding whether it applies to the president.

Elias said he does not see why legislators would pass the “anti-rebellion” and “anti-insurrection” clauses and leave the president out.

“The president is the commander-in-chief and the president is the chief officer of the United States,” he said. Under conservative theories, which talk about a unitary executive, the president is the only officer of executive officer of the legislative branch, he added.

Elias also said the judge’s ruling may have to do with the “tremendous pressure, the doxing, intimidation, the threats that come to everyone who stands up against Donald Trump.”

Shedding light on what is to come, the lawyer noted that the voters who brought the lawsuit in the Colorado state court have already filed an appeal to the state’s Supreme Court. The Colorado Supreme Court will get the next bite at this, he said, adding that he hoped it does not overturn the finding that Trump engaged in insurrection.

Then the case will likely go to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will have the ultimate authority to interpret the U.S. constitutional provision, Elias said.

Read Next: How To Invest In Startups