Famed attorney: Trump prosecutors shouldn’t get to voice this one word

By Joe Kovacs

President Donald J. Trump delivers remarks in support of the Farmers to Families Food Box distribution program Monday, Aug. 24, 2020, at Flavor First Growers and Packers in Mills River, North Carolina. (Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead)
President Donald J. Trump delivers remarks in support of the Farmers to Families Food Box distribution program Monday, Aug. 24, 2020, at Flavor First Growers and Packers in Mills River, North Carolina. (Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead)

While former President Donald Trump is now charged with numerous crimes, including violation of the Espionage Act, one of the most respected legal minds in America says prosecutors should not be able to voice one word in court that could prejudice the jury.


In a column posted this week by Democrat Alan Dershowitz, the professor emeritus at Harvard Law School says the 1917 statute is actually “misnamed because it covers a great many offenses that don’t involve spying or giving secrets to the enemy. In fact, over the years it has been used extensively against patriotic Americans who have opposed wars and dissented from other government actions.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

“In Trump’s case, he is being accused primarily of unlawful possession of allegedly classified material.

“But because he has been charged under the Espionage Act, many people have been misled into believing the accusations against him have something to do with espionage, spying or even treason.”

Dershowitz says use of the e-word is “extremely prejudicial” to Trump, at least in the the court of public opinion.

“It would be even more prejudicial in a court of law if the jury were to hear that word in connection with his case.”

Is the news we hear every day actually broadcasting messages from God? The answer is an absolute yes! Find out how!

The famed law professor suggests Trump’s lawyers “immediately move for what’s called a motion in limine prohibiting the use of the word espionage by prosecutors, either inside the courtroom or outside it, but especially in front of the jury.”

“‘Espionage’ has no relevance to the upcoming trial. It associates Trump with some of the worst offenses imaginable.”

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz
Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz

He reminds Americans that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed for espionage, and that numerous former government officials have served long terms for the same charge.

“Those defendants actually provided classified and other secret information to our enemies,” he writes. “Trump should not be painted with that invidious brush, based on the evidence in his case.”

Dershowitz says it’s not uncommon for judges to prohibit prosecutors from voicing prejudicial terms in front of juries.

“The judge generally weighs the probative versus the prejudicial impact. In criminal cases, judges should always err on the side of protecting the rights of defendants.”

“This is not a hard case for barring the use of the term espionage, since it has little or no probative effect and a vast potential for prejudice. That the name of the statute uses the word is no excuse to let the prosecution use it. Often statutes have broad names that have little or nothing to do with the charges in a particular case.”

As an illustration, Dershowitz proposed a hypothetical example:

“Congress passes a statute and entitles it ‘The Protection Against Child Molestation and Insider Trading Act.’

“Should prosecutors be allowed to mention the first part of that statute in a case that does not involve child molestation? Of course not.

“Nor should the prosecution in this case be allowed to mention the word espionage, even though Congress misnamed the statute with that loaded term.”

WND is now on Trump’s Truth Social! Follow us @WNDNews

The professor says in the Trump case, “the law should be referred to only by mentioning the allegedly unlawful possession of classified material. That is the essence of this prosecution, and the defendant should not be prejudiced by reference to other aspects of the statute that have no direct bearing on this case.”

He adds it’s not too early for Trump’s attorneys to file this motion, as “already, Trump has been prejudiced by media references to the law’s ‘espionage’ title.”

“The court can’t stop the media from using that word, but by explicitly ruling it out of the trial, it can have an impact on public opinion and thus on the potential jury pool,” Dershowitz says.

“Espionage is a word that denotes some of the most evil intentions on the part of those accused of it. The impact could be subtle, even unconscious, but it is real.”

Former President Donald Trump appears in federal court in Miami, Florida, on Tuesday, June 13, 2023. (Courtroom sketch)
Former President Donald Trump appears in federal court in Miami, Florida, on Tuesday, June 13, 2023. (Courtroom sketch)

He acknowledges “any improper possession of highly classified material may pose some danger to national security if it gets into the wrong hands. But that would be true as well of the improper possession and use of classified material by others who have not been charged, such as President Joe Biden, Vice President Mike Pence and former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.”

He concludes by saying ‘the media themselves should be more responsible and explain that the charges are under provisions of the statute that have nothing to do with spying.

“In any trial of Donald Trump, there will be prejudice on both sides. He is hated and loved by people who have already chosen sides.

“It’ll be hard enough to select jurors who are able to consider the evidence without predispositions and prejudices. The court should go out of its way to reduce those risks to a fair trial.”

Follow Joe on Twitter @JoeKovacsNews

IMPORTANT NOTE: It’s hard to believe it’s really happening, but it is. Male athletes pretend to be females, dominate their sports, and are thereby rapidly destroying women’s competitive sports worldwide. Convicted male criminals suddenly claim to be transgender so they can be confined in a women’s prison and sexually abuse the female inmates there. Men claiming to be female likewise invade women’s locker rooms, bathrooms, schools, dormitories, sororities, shelters, spas and social organizations – and in the process steal women’s scholarships, advancement, honors and myriad other opportunities.

Meanwhile, transgender groomers and recruiters in schools and on social media platforms like TikTok are continually feeding and expanding the current “mass hysteria” craze that has already led countless teen girls to take testosterone and undergo double mastectomies in a pathetic effort to become boys. No wonder the CDC reports 3 in 5 teen girls say they feel “persistently sad or hopeless” and almost 1 in 3 say they have seriously considered committing suicide.

All of this on top of the radical left’s renewed obsession with killing women’s unborn babies via abortion.

The “woke” left’s maniacal attack on women and girls, virtually unreported by the rest of the media, is the entire focus of the sensational June issue of WND’s critically acclaimed WHISTLEBLOWER magazine, titled “THE LEFT’S TOTAL WAR ON WOMEN.” WHISTLEBLOWER is available in both the popular print edition and a state-of-the-art digital version, either single issues or discounted annual subscriptions.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


Leave a Comment