David Brooks:
Well, obviously, they’re trying to send a note of intimidation, not only to her, but to all judges and maybe to all Americans.
But I don’t yet know the specific details of this case, whether she escorted the guy out the jury door or whether she led him. So that’s all murky. I don’t want to comment on this specific case.
But especially on the issue of immigration, there are a lot of people who are appalled by what the administration is doing. And there will be times for civil disobedience. And, to me, if she — let’s say she did escort this guy out the door. If federal enforcement agencies come to your courtroom and you help a guy escape, that is two things.
One, it strikes me as maybe something illegal, but it also strikes me as something heroic. And in times of trouble, then people are sometimes called to do civil disobedience. And in my view, when people do civil disobedience, they have to pay the price. That’s part of the heroism of it, frankly.
And so you can both think that she shouldn’t have legally done this and that morally protecting somebody against, maybe not even in this case, but in other cases, frankly, a predatory enforcement agency, sometimes, civil disobedience is necessary.
And I don’t know if we will get to this point, but we could get to this point in weeks or months where acts of civil disobedience on a lot of fronts may be necessary. And the Trump administration will probably welcome that kind of fight, but their opponents should welcome that kind of fight.
And that’s one of the ways you can shift public opinion, because one of the ways authoritarians lose control is when their opponents protest in a nonviolent way, and the authoritarians crack down violently. That’s the way you delegitimize an authoritarian regime.
And so that — it may come to that.
