Ignorance of law is no excuse, not even for a president

Lawyers learn at the beginning of law school that a rule that came from ancient Rome is still true.

“Ignorantia legis neminem excusat.”

President Donald Trump hasn’t caught on to this, and many cable news providers don’t seem to understand it either.

Republican House Leader Paul Ryan prefers to view obvious law violations as simply part of the learning curve.

CNN asks; “Would the President's ignorance of the complex obstruction laws be a defense? Could Trump, a president with no prior government experience, argue in his defense that he didn't think what he did violated any law?

“It's all up to Congress to decide.

“The general, well-known rule is that ignorance of the law is not a defense to a crime. So ingrained is this maxim that most lay people can recite it.”

But CNN says Congress can always override this rule.

The Supreme Court has already overridden the rule in a case that involved police. No should be expected to know the law better than police, it would seem.

ThinkProgress reports: “In a splintered 8–1 ruling, the court found that cops who pulled over Nicholas Heien for a broken taillight were justified in a subsequent search of Heien’s car, even though North Carolina law says that having just one broken taillight is not a violation of the law.

“The ruling means that police did not violate Heien’s rights when they later searched his car and found cocaine, and that the cocaine evidence can’t be suppressed at a later trial. But it also means that the U.S. Supreme “The Court declined the opportunity to draw a line limiting the scope of police stops, at a time when they are as rampant and racially disproportionate as ever. Instead, police may have considerably more leeway to stop passengers on the road, even in a number of jurisdictions that had previously said cops are not justified in mistakes of law.”

Using that kind of reasoning it is possible to see how the court would excuse Trump, the leader of the land. How could he be expected to know all laws. Of course some would say he has plenty of staff who should help him stay within the law, if he will listen to them.

While legal opinions are divided on whether Trump committed  obstruction of justice, and whether he could be prosecuted if he did.

One thing is clear.

No one with any credibility, this side of Russia doubts that they intervened in our last election to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House.

Even Nixon did not consort with Russia.

Many are saying Trump should removed from office from not stopping the Russian. Indeed, by most accounts, he is friends with Vladimir Putin. Our foreign allies have disowned Trump, even Canada. Ex-FBI Director James Comey spelled it all out.