The Hill: [Alan Dershowitz] There is much speculation as to the significance of the search of the offices and hotel room of President Trump‘s lawyer, Michael Cohen. To obtain a search warrant, prosecutors must demonstrate to a judge that they have probable cause to believe that the premises to be searched contain evidence of crime. They must also specify the area to be searched, the items to be seized and, in searches of computers, the word searches to be used.
At least that’s the constitutional requirement in theory, especially where the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is involved, in addition to the general Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches. Yet, in practice, judges often give the FBI considerable latitude, relying on the “firewalls” and “taint teams” they set up to protect the subject of the search from violation of his or her constitutional rights.
But the firewalls and taint teams are comprised of government agents who themselves may not be entitled to read or review many of the items seized. It is an imperfect protection of important constitutional rights. That’s why Justice Department officials must be careful to limit the searching of lawyers’ offices to compelling cases involving serious crimes. We don’t know at this point what the prosecutors are looking for but, if it relates to payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels, that would not seem to justify so potentially intrusive a search of Cohen’s confidential lawyer-client files.
There are, of course, exceptions to the lawyer-client privilege. First, the lawyer must be acting as a lawyer, not as a friend or business associate. But the scope of a lawyer’s work is quite broad, encompassing much more than merely giving legal advice. It includes settling cases by making payments to potential litigants. Second, the lawyer must be engaged in lawful activities on behalf of the clients. Illegal or fraudulent activities are not covered by the privilege. Nor are communications with third persons, such as the lawyer for the other side, though such communications may be covered by the much weaker “settlement privilege.”
Civil libertarians should be concerned whenever the government interferes with the lawyer-client relationship. Clients should be able to rely on confidentiality when they disclose their most intimate secrets in an effort to secure their legal rights. A highly publicized raid on the president’s lawyer will surely shake the confidence of many clients in promises of confidentiality by their lawyers. They will not necessarily understand the nuances of the confidentiality rules and their exceptions. They will see a lawyer’s office being raided and all his files seized.
I believe we would have been hearing more from civil libertarians – the American Civil Liberties Union, attorney groups and privacy advocates – if the raid had been on Hillary Clinton‘s lawyer. Many civil libertarians have remained silent about potential violations of President Trump’s rights because they strongly disapprove of him and his policies. That is a serious mistake, because these violations establish precedents that lie around like loaded guns capable of being aimed at other targets. more here
So the next time there is a leak of something classified the FBI can raid all the reporter’s documents and sift through them for where the leak came from? Or maybe all the NYT or WAPO phone records and email messages?
I am sure they shopped around for some time before they found a judge willing to stake a career on it. I also believe that they assume they will not, ultimately, be able to use any evidence they find in these raids in a court of justice.
The idea is to pour through everything and leak the more salacious bits to the court of public opinion, timed, of course, for maximum effect.
Rules only apply to Republicans
All’s fair in love and war…
With due respect to Mr. Dershowitz, this is all he is concerned about over the past 10 years? What about:
An Obama administration that willfully refused to enforce duly enacted laws of the United States, such as our immigration policy.
Governmental units, state and federal, that openly defy duly enacted laws of the United States and obstruct efforts of the Executive branch to enforce these laws.
The increasing use of law enforce agencies, the FBI in particular, in bringing perjury charges against individuals like Martha Steward and Scooter Libby even though it was proven these individuals committed no crime.
The tolerance of government to allow unlawful activity because the groups engaged in these activities are politically aligned with those government units.
Providing welfare and social benefits to persons who are illegally in this country.
Increasing discrimination against American citizens in favor of illegal immigrants.
The blatant efforts of government officials to blithely ignore the Constitution, including the First and Second Amendments.
The fact that most of our judges are now chosen based upon political reliability factors instead of legal ability and analysis.
The actions of elected and appointed officials to undermine and impeach a duly elected President of the United States.
We may have passed the point of no return. Leftists may believe that they have a right to engage in unlawful activities in order to promote their agenda, and conservatives and moderates (i.e. most citizens) are starting to ignore the law to fight back. While I am glad that Mr. Dershowitz now believes that things have gone too far with a raid on Mr. Cohen’s offices, he should have been more concerned during our disastrous Obama years.
What’s up with Cohen? First he volunteers that he paid Stormy Whore Woman, now this.
“Michael Cohen has lunch with Donny Deutsch hours after the Morning Joe contributor said that Trump’s lawyer could be on the ‘right side of history’ and help ‘bring down the presidency'”
Wyatt, easy answer: Dershowitz is ALL about Dershowitz. No one else really matters to him.
Cohen must be dirty, or being blackmailed over something. Pretty tough to trust a high profile lawyer. I might trust a porn star first.
“prosecutors must demonstrate to a judge that they have probable cause to believe that the premises to be searched contain evidence of crime.”
not since obama was sworn into office.
all the fisa abuses including the current witch hunt of potus Trump did not have probable cause. collusion ? what law was that a part of ?
we have stepped off the edge here.
the deep state wants our reaction to be violent so they can confiscate the guns before shutting up the dissidents.
MITH
Take out your wallet and PAY ATTENTION. These guys ARE REPUBLICANS. BUSH PUT THEM IN THEIR “HIGH” PLACES!
Once lawyers are affected something has to be done!
With government coming between the relationship between patients & doctors, it’s no surprise they’d make an assault on attorney-client privilege.
Both dangerous paths.
Some call it a ‘witch hunt’ – it seems to me more like the longest unsuccessful fishing expedition EVAH!
All’s fair in love and war…
Some call it a ‘witch hunt’ – it seems to me more like the longest unsuccessful fishing expedition EVAH!
barya Citi
A couple great comments. My opinion is they are not fishing. They new there was nada to begin with. This is a massive stall tactic by Globalist to try and preserve their revenue stream. We need to kill them all. Wait, I’m a comedian.