Attorney and President Donald Trump defender Alan Dershowitz is sickeningly insisting that statutory rape is constitutional as his connections to billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein continue to be exposed.
In an op-ed he wrote 20 years ago, Dershowitz literally called for lowering the age of consent to as low as 14-years-old, as ethics lawyer Richard Painter pointed out on Monday.
Why is @AlanDersh trying to lower the age of consent in this op-ed? 15? Really? https://t.co/K8LyEho50X
— Richard W. Painter (@RWPUSA) July 29, 2019
“Reasonable people can disagree about whether [the age of consent] should be as low as 14.”
ls @AlanDersh kidding (pun intended)?
Does he really think that?— Richard W. Painter (@RWPUSA) July 29, 2019
It’s little wonder why Epstein, who is currently charged with child sex trafficking by the Southern District of New York, once hired Dershowitz as his lawyer.
In response, Dershowitz made things worse for himself by defending his perverted stance.
I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex? 1/ https://t.co/48Thb8Uaym
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) July 29, 2019
I challenge my readers to distinguish the cases, as a matter of constitutional law. I did not suggest that it is moral to have sex with a 16 year old, but rather that the issue presents a constitutional conundrum worthy of discussion. 2/
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) July 29, 2019
I also pointed out that, statutory rape laws are applied quite selectively and often against young teenagers. That’s why I also say there are Romeo and Juliet exceptions. Lets debate not name call. End/
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) July 29, 2019
Statutory rape laws exist to protect minors. What Dershowitz is advocating for is to repeal these laws, which would give rapists the ability to claim the minors they raped consented.
Legal and law enforcement experts weighed in.
Statutory rape laws criminalize the perpetrator’s conduct, not the victim’s.
Thus, the question is: does the adult perpetrator have a constitutional right to have sex with a minor? The victim’s rights don’t change the answer, which is and should be “absolutely not.”
— Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) July 29, 2019
It would also shift (and raise) the government’s burden of proof, from a presumption that there was no consent to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim did not consent ?
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) July 29, 2019
Because there’s a difference between making a deliberate, considered choice about your body, and being coerced to make that choice by older, more powerful men when you are desperate, afraid, and with no one to turn to. Life is not a law school exam, nor should the law be.
— Tor Ekeland (@TorEkelandPLLC) July 29, 2019
Correct. It’s a transparent attempt to protect adult men under the guise of support for the “rights” of 16 year old girls. It merits no analysis whatsoever, imho.
— Elizabeth de la Vega (@Delavegalaw) July 29, 2019
You’re so disingenuous. Shame on you. You’re a blight upon our profession.
— Andrew C Laufer, Esq (@lauferlaw) July 29, 2019
Have you lost your damn mind?
— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) July 29, 2019
Seriously, how does this sicko still have a job at Harvard Law?
Featured Image: Screenshot
