One of many first issues President Donald Trump did was fireplace all of the attorneys. Maybe he and his minions haven’t learn Shakespeare just lately, however they intuited the function of a Shakespearean villain, nonetheless.
In Shakespeare’s Henry VI: Half 2, Dick the Butcher says to his compatriots, “The very first thing we do is, let’s kill all of the attorneys.” Over time, the jape has change into commonplace, reflecting how a lot folks have come to dislike attorneys. And so, some have welcomed Trump’s current resolution to fireside the navy’s high three attorneys, often called choose advocates normal, as a justified comeuppance.
One can perceive the final intuition. Attorneys can look like nothing however a value, implementing guidelines and telling folks no after they need to hear sure. Anybody who has been in a courtroom dispute can perceive the point of view.
However the sentiment is the improper message to take from Shakespeare. The context through which Dick speaks makes clear that Shakespeare, no less than, thought that attorneys have been a bulwark towards evil and that the rule of regulation was important to a simply and honest society. Dick and his co-conspirator Jack Cade—anti-intellectuals who wished to burn all of the books and kill anybody who may learn—have been main a rebel. They wished to create an ignorant inhabitants, unaware of its rights and simply led.
And so, within the context of the play, Dick’s admonition to kill the attorneys is a plan to remove the protectiveness of the regulation, by eradicating those that guard it and implement its protections. Or, as Supreme Court docket Justice John Paul Stevens stated in a 1985 resolution: “As a cautious studying of that textual content will reveal, Shakespeare insightfully realized that disposing of attorneys is a step within the course of a totalitarian type of authorities.”
It’s clear that Trump’s workforce has the identical studying of Shakespeare, minus the pejorative view of totalitarianism. With well-planned steps, the administration has moved to take full management of the federal paperwork and remove opposition. Think about Trump’s efforts to say management over the management of the navy equipment. Though his resolution to fireside the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Workers and the chief of naval operations (the one Black man and the one girl at that stage) garnered most of the headlines, probably the most insidious step he took was his resolution to fireside the highest choose advocates normal of the Military, Navy, and Air Pressure. Every had tons of of attorneys working in his command.
JAGs are the navy’s attorneys. Like attorneys in civilian life, a good portion of what JAGs do is prosaic. They assessment procurement contracts and deal with navy personnel complaints. They prosecute and defend legal circumstances involving service members accused of crimes (suppose Tom Cruise in A Few Good Males). They actually have a function in making certain the navy’s compliance with home environmental legal guidelines.
However much more notable, they’ve a singular operate in articulating the authorized requirements which might be related to fight operations. They don’t command any troops, however they do advise the commanders on the legality of their operations. This will imply limiting the techniques that the troops can use or the weapons that they could make use of. It means setting the troops’ guidelines of engagement in a battle zone. It means trying to make sure that pointless civilian casualties are averted (suppose Helen Mirren and Alan Rickman in Eye within the Sky). It means, to quote one instance with which I’m acquainted, that earlier than U.S. CYBERCOM deploys a brand new cyberattack instrument, the instrument is reviewed to be sure that its deployment can be lawful below the legal guidelines of armed battle.
Briefly, it generally means telling navy officers or civilian navy leaders no. A JAG may, for instance, inform the president that he can’t deploy troops in Washington, D.C., with orders to shoot protesters within the legs, or deploy them to shoot unarmed migrants crossing the border.
However what attorneys see as implementing the navy rule of regulation, Trump’s loyalists see as efforts to emasculate true warriors. That’s why Pete Hegseth, Trump’s secretary of protection, has derisively referred to as JAG officers “jagoffs” and contended that JAG officers implementing the legal guidelines of armed fight put their very own priorities forward of “having the backs of those that are making the powerful calls on the entrance line.”
The firing of the JAG management seems meant to cow JAG line attorneys and make them afraid to offer recommendation to navy management which may run counter to the desire of civilian command. The underlying legal guidelines received’t change, however now commanders are unlikely to get the frank authorized counsel they want.
And that may be a method for catastrophe. Up to now, the dearth of authorized oversight has led to vital errors, such because the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Sooner or later, such a scarcity will imply that when the following illegal order from Trump comes down (say, a course to U.S. CYBERCOM to make use of its capabilities to gather info on home political opponents), JAG officers can be much less properly positioned to say no.
And that’s what Trump desires. JAG officers are generally referred to as the “conscience” of the navy. However Trump doesn’t need a navy with a conscience. He desires a pliant navy that does what he instructions somewhat than what the regulation requires.
Firing the JAG management is step one in securing this form of management. Eliminating the attorneys is, as Jack Cade says, an important step on the highway to “when I’m king, as king I can be.” Persevering with down this path will, nearly inevitably, result in a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions.
