Once again, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., is facing federal corruption charges, this time for his alleged involvement in a scheme to provide sensitive information to the Egyptian government in return for cash, gold bars and a Mercedes sports car.
In the wake of the indictment, Menendez decided to step down from his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. However, he has balked at resigning from the Senate despite multiple calls from his Democratic colleagues to do just that.
A few Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, have taken a different approach, reiterating that although Menendez has been charged with serious crimes, he has not been convicted and, therefore, remains innocent until proven guilty. “He has a right to due process and a fair trial,” Schumer said.
As a libertarian, I often disagree with Schumer on policies and politics. However, I agree with his stance on Menendez.
For starters, Menendez has been here before. In 2015, he was accused of violating federal corruption statutes. But, after a lengthy trial, the charges were dismissed after the jury failed to reach a verdict.
In the United States, we must uphold the principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty. This applies to all Americans, including elected officials. Think of it this way: If an everyday American were accused of a crime, would we demand that they resign from their livelihood before a trial even takes place? I sure hope not.
Moreover, if Menendez were to resign based on an indictment, it would set a dangerous precedent that could incentivize the Department of Justice to pursue charges against other elected officials with the hope that public pressure would result in resignation.
Not that long ago, we witnessed a mob-like call for Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., to resign after pictures emerged of him allegedly groping a woman. Eventually, Franken caved to the demands of the mob and resigned his Senate seat before any investigation into the allegations had been completed.
Almost immediately after he chose to resign, Franken regretted the decision. And, perhaps more important, many of the senators who advocated for his abrupt resignation came to regret their decision to call for his ouster.
According to former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.C., “If there’s one decision I’ve made that I would take back, it’s the decision to call for his resignation. It was made in the heat of the moment, without concern for exactly what this was.”
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., also expressed qualms concerning her actions in the immediate aftermath of the allegations against Franken, saying, “We needed more facts. That due process didn’t happen is not good for our democracy.”
Fortunately, there is a process to adjudicate accusations against elected officials: elections. About one year from now, Menendez’s current six-year term will expire. He is facing a primary challenger, Rep. Andy Kim, who has raised $1.9 million in his bid to unseat Menendez.
Rather than force his resignation, it should be up to the voters to decide if Menendez deserves another term. His trial is scheduled to begin in the spring, which means it should be resolved well before the polls open next fall.
Ultimately, it is best to let the voters of New Jersey decide his fate.
____
ABOUT THE WRITER
Chris Talgo is the editorial director at The Heartland Institute. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.
___
(This essay is available to Tribune News Service subscribers. TNS did not subsidize the writing of this column; the opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of TNS or its editors.)
©2023 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
KeyWords:: 537509fa-9e28-4b22-a9a1-33c42c057643
537509fa 9e28 4b22 a9a1 33c42c057643
BC-MENENDEZ-COUNTERPOINT:MCT
BC MENENDEZ COUNTERPOINT MCT
