On Friday, the Center for Citizenship and Constitutional Government hosted a panel discussion on the 2024 election and the future of American democracy. The center welcomed professor John Yoo from Berkeley Law and Harry Litman, senior legal affairs columnist at the Los Angeles Times, to the Carey Auditorium for a debate on issues relevant to the upcoming election.
Yoo, a card-carrying Republican, represented the conservative side of the debate while Litman, who had a position on the Obama-Biden campaign staff in 2008, argued the liberal position. Both men have previously worked in multiple levels of government, including the executive branch and as clerks for Supreme Court justices.
The director of the center, Vincent Phillip Muñoz, moderated the debate. He opened the session by remarking that the subject of the center's debate had changed radically since the idea for the event was conceived in the spring.
“There was more Trump prosecution, then there was a conviction, then the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, and then Trump got shot, Biden got deposed,” Muñoz said. “And that all happened within about six weeks.”
The lively debate covered most of those topics across four rounds of questions, followed by a short question and answer session from students. The first topic discussed was the prosecution of former President Donald Trump and whether it was a threat to democracy.
“I think that the prosecutions have been a disaster,” Yoo said. “If you wanted to get Donald Trump out of the race, which I think was the purpose of the prosecutions, all they did was guarantee Trump winning the primary.”
As former employees of the Justice Department, both participants agreed the prosecution could have been done more effectively. Although the two agreed often throughout the debate, some issues were more divisive.
According to Yoo, the fault for the poorly executed federal prosecution concerning the Jan. 6 case lay solely with the Biden administration while Litman took a wider view of the argument.
“Jack Smith played the legal role that Jack Smith is supposed to play, but already by the time Smith was appointed, we were past the point of a broader solution,” Litman said.
Both Yoo and Litman lamented the extreme political ecosystem under the two-party system, which has led to controversy regarding the 2024 campaign. Yoo noted, even many Republicans see the issues presented by Trump.
“The Republican establishment doesn’t want Trump to be president,” he said. “He represents a populist uprising against the establishment and against the way government is done.”
Litman agreed and framed the topic as a broader political problem, focusing on the use of governmental positions as ways for political gain.
“Because of our polarization politically, we had a failure of institutions to be able to bring some consensus choice or wise solution to what is largely a political problem,” he said.
Towards the end of the discussion, as Yoo extolled the political system’s ability to check politicians who lie, he was interrupted by a woman yelling in the crowd.
“I cannot remain silent,” she said. “Not all politicians lie. I’m 74 years old, I have an MBA from Yale University, and I will not be quiet when lies are being told.”
Despite repeated attempts to calm her down by Muñoz, Litman and Yoo, the woman continued to yell for about two minutes. Other audience members spoke up with their frustration at her, one even saying they were getting nauseous from the noise.
Security escorted her from her seat out of the auditorium in order to restore order. On her way out, she made one parting remark.
“God bless you all,” she said. “I knew Father Hesburgh. I know Pete Buttigieg.”
The first half of her statement drew a smattering of applause from the Notre Dame contingent of the audience, but the mention of the Secretary of Transportation resulted in jeers and retching noises from the back of the room.
Despite the tension created by the interruption, the debate continued smoothly. Yoo lightened the mood with a joke, saying, “This reminds me of teaching at Berkeley.”
Both speakers drew laughter from the audience on multiple occasions. When asked to predict who was going to win the election, Yoo quoted Yogi Berra.
“Predictions are hard, especially when it comes to the future,” he said.
Despite the debate's serious subject matter, the debate was remarkably civil. The participants were respectful and even friendly, and neither one interrupted the other or raised their voice often.
The debate concluded with both candidates expressing their faith in the American political system and returning to the theme of the debate, ‘the future of American democracy.’
“I think there is this fear of [Trump] because of his rhetoric, that exaggerates him as this threat to democracy,” Yoo said. “We’ve had all kinds of colorful characters that have run for president, that political establishments of those times thought, 'How can we let this guy be president?’ But still, we had a system that survived and handled it, and I think our system has functioned pretty damn well for 230 years.”
