,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This is such a silly position that only an out-of-touch ivory tower college professor could have come up with it. By "silly" I mean it's not worth arguing against, as nobody serious will agree with it. But perhaps it's worth a teachable moment.
The right to a vigorous defense is essential to our society. Everyone enjoys that right. The Boston Bomber, who placed the bomb right next to children, got a vigorous defense. We don't punish the lawyers who defended him, we cheer them.
We cheer the lawyer because we know that justice was served, that we didn't get the wrong guy, that we didn't simply pick the first Arab-looking person out of the crowd an punish them. We know it was HIM, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
In the Nuremberg trials of former Nazis, some went to jail for life, some we let free. We didn't act as an angry lynch mob out for vengeance, we acted as a civilized society meting out justice.
During the American revolution, nobody wanted to defend the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre. But John Adams stepped forward into the unpopular spot. Because if you believe in the cause of civil rights, you believe in rights even for the enemy.
During the 2016 election, the Republicans brought up a case when Hillary worked as a court appointed attorney for an accused child rapist. She did her job defending her client, as she should've, which the fucktard anti-patriot Republicans thought was a bad thing.
So in this case, yes Trump's ICE is in the indefensible position how children are treated in detention centers. But the lawyer trying to defend this is doing their job. They aren't the ones who should be punished, Trump and ICE are.
