[Part of our ongoing exploration of Healing America’s Narratives: The Feminine, the Masculine, & Our Collective National Shadow, this essay focuses on Chapter 10 and the role that money and celebrity play in subverting the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection” clause. The book is available here.]

Donald Trump turned himself in to authorities yesterday following his indictment by the Manhattan district attorney. In anticipation of turning himself in, much as he had done leading up to the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, Trump incited his followers on social media to come to New York City and protest his indictment. Mostly it was journalists who showed up.

Legal proceedings are a way of life for Donald Trump. As a candidate in 2016 he had already been involved in more than 3,500 lawsuits — a number that has subsequently increased. His spokespeople claimed that that’s just business as usual for similarly sized companies, but USA Today reported in 2016 that contrasted with billionaires Ed DeBartolo, Donald Bren, Stephen Ross, Sam Zell, and Larry Silverstein, the 45th president was “involved in more legal skirmishes than all five of the others — combined.”¹

The former president is, however, just a symptom of the deeper issue — how financial wealth, influence, access, and allegedly political fundraising² subvert the equal protection of the laws clause of the 14th Amendment. If his track record holds up, he won’t be convicted, and if he is convicted, the conviction and subsequent appeals process won’t significantly impact how he behaves. We’ll return to him at the end of this essay.

Here’s another example: If I had somehow found myself in the audience for the 2022 Academy Awards (unlikely), and I had made it onto the stage without being tackled by security personnel (very unlikely), and I had slapped the host in the face (extremely unlikely), I would have been arrested and convicted of battery at the very least. Both the attacker and the attacked were wealthy, accomplished entertainers and celebrities. No criminal charges were filed, and no civil action was taken.

The 14th Amendment attempts to guarantee equal protection of the laws under federal and state governments. It was passed in 1868 as a post-Civil-War attempt to prevent the states — especially the former Confederate states — from making or enforcing “any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” “depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” or denying “to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” It neither guarantees that equal access to competent legal representation is available to all regardless of financial status, nor that nongovernment actors have to treat those with lots of money and those with little or none equally.

As with most legislation, the amendment didn’t suddenly change people or things. The victims of thousands of lynchings, most of which occurred in the former slave states between 1870 and 1950, were deprived of due process, life, and liberty, often with the cooperation, and sometimes the participation, of local law enforcement.³ George Floyd’s 2020 lynching was actually perpetrated exclusively by four members of local law enforcement in Minneapolis. The equal protection clause seems to be working in that case, albeit in large part to public outcry regarding previous similar lynchings, but Mr. Floyd is still dead.

The U.S. Constitution, its amendments, and other laws do not guarantee the literal manifestation of anyone’s access, safety, or equality. Most Americans cannot afford thousands (or even tens) of lawsuits. Many Americans cannot afford one.

Wealth and title, whether earned or given, fulfill Orwell’s pig Napoleon’s revision of “all animals are equal” to “all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”.

In America, that pig has it right.

Sure there are occasional exceptions — Harvey Weinstein for example — but they are just that, exceptions, and in Weinstein’s case, some of his victims, while not as wealthy as he, were wealthy, accomplished and well known.

Donald Trump’s more equal advantage is further enhanced by his past presidential status. As Richard Nixon clarified to David Frost in 1977, “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Nixon was protected by his followers regarding Watergate, and Trump continues to be protected by his followers regarding the January 6 riots he incited. While he has used millions of political donor dollars to pay his own legal fees, there is no record of his providing legal or financial help for those arrested for following his direction to “stop the steal” on January 6.

Healing America’s Narratives explores the underlying issues of inequality — how the founders’ cultural givens elevated some voices and subjugated others. The elevation and subjugation continues in the third decade of the 21st century.

_____

1. Nick Penzenstadler, and Susan Page, “Trump’s 3,500 lawsuits un-precedented for a presidential nominee,” USA Today, June 1, 2016 / updated October 23, 2017, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/
2. Maggie Haberman, “Trump Spent $10 Million From His PAC on His Legal Bills Last Year” New York Times, February 21, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/us/politics/trump-campaign-spending-pac-lawyer-bills.html#:~:text=The%20money%20that%20went%20to,and%202022%2C%20the%20filings%20show.
3. Equal Justice Initiative, Lynching in America, 39–47. These pages provide statistics along with some narrative. The volume’s 90 pages provide a searing look into its title. It is also available online: https://lynchinginamerica.eji.org/report/