The Logan Act Is Not a Friend to Liberalism

First, the petitioners note that the Logan Act of 1799 explicitly prohibits unauthorized citizens from engaging in diplomatic negotiations with foreign governments. Next, they suggest without evidence that the GOP’s letter did just that. And, finally, they conclude that its sponsors are guilty of a felony. Is it time for Cotton to wear orange?

Unsurprisingly, the answer to this is “No.” Indeed, one almost has to feel embarrassed by the scale of the petitioners’ credulity. For a start, the Logan Act almost certainly does not apply to open letters that are penned by representatives from the Senate — which body, we might remember, enjoys a constitutionally enumerated role within the nation’s foreign policy.

via The Logan Act Is Not a Friend to Liberalism.


2 thoughts on “The Logan Act Is Not a Friend to Liberalism”

  1. I also thought Rich Lowry did a great job of putting the Cotton letter in perspective:

    “Cotton’s alleged sedition is hard to fathom. It’s not as though he wrote secret letters to the Iranians (that’s what Obama has made a practice of doing). It’s not as though he traveled to a foreign country to glad-hand a foreign thug in an express effort to undermine the president’s foreign policy (that’s what then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi did when she went to Damascus and met with Bashar Assad).”
    And so on.

    1. My husband snarked that of course they think talking the Constitution factually is treason, they think Vets are terrorist threats.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s