Circular Logic

"I am the law." -- Judge Dredd, a fictional character.

   There has been increasing talk among pundits as to whether a sitting president can be indicted. Some point out that it has never happened before, and therefore cannot happen now.
   Others note that it has been Department of Justice policy not to try, and therefore that policy should not, cannot or must not be changed.
   Meanwhile, what's to stop state officials from filing charges? They are not bound by federal DOJ policy. Moreover, that policy can change.
   Evidence is piling up that the current president of the United States was involved in illegal activities before, during and after his election. While no charges have yet been filed, if the allegations and implications are true, there were multiple violations of law -- civil, criminal and constitutional.
   Some defenders claim that the president cannot be indicted because he is the president. Others, however, point out that no one is above the law, and to assert such a claim is circular logic.

   One of the reasons the American colonies declared independence from Britain was to establish that the head of state -- at that time King George III -- could not arbitrarily dictate policy. That precedent was established centuries before, when the Great Charter of 1066 set limits on the powers of the monarch.
   Currently, America is faced with a similar difficulty, as its president tries to impose his will on the rest of the nation and its government agencies, including Congress and the Supreme Court.
   So there is a legal and constitutional fight brewing, based on whether a president can be indicted while in office. Alternatively, must opponents wait until a president's term ends or he is impeached by the House of Representatives, convicted by the Senate and removed from office, as the Constitution provides.
   The Constitution stipulates that the person convicted "shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law." (Article I, Section Three, Paragraph Seven)
   So the debate is whether the current president should face legal charges now, or must prosecutors wait until he is out of office. Meanwhile, there is the possibility that a president could continue illegal activities while in office, unless Congress ousts him first.
   In effect, this would put a sitting president above the laws he has vowed to preserve, protect and defend.
   Federal laws, that is. The president has no jurisdiction over state laws.