It is tempting to imagine Donald Trump, his sons, and the rest of his administration standing in the dock answering criminal charges. It would be satisfying, but a waste of time, considering the amount of work needed to repair the damage that he has done to this country. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be held responsible; I’m saying that repair and restoration should come before revenge.
I know some of you are thinking “It’s not revenge, it’s justice.” I agree that justice needs to be done, but it should be deliberate, fact-based justice, not the weaponized justice of the Trump administration. More importantly, it should not detract from the important work of rebuilding public faith in our government and restoring important programs that have been destroyed.
The Democrats message should be first that they’re going to make the government work for the people again and that they will provide remedies where the law allows. At the same time, they must assure the public that where there is credible evidence of wrongdoing there will be a proper and independent investigation. They must state that no one gets immunity because they are powerful or wealthy and likewise that no one loses their constitutional rights because they are unpopular.
The guiding principle should be that they will not sacrifice justice for the appearance of reconciliation and will not sacrifice the public’s welfare for the satisfaction of punishment. They will repair injuries, establish responsibility in a fair manner, and make it harder for anyone else to abuse government powers.
We must also hold the members of the Trump administration accountable to send a message to future political leaders that such behavior is not tolerable. It is important to recognize the difference between illegal behavior and bad policy. The Congress should concentrate on repairing bad policy but should at the same time put in place the procedures for punishing crimes. Special prosecutors and revived inspectors general would be the most reasonable method of pursuing the legal avenues.
Convening impeachment hearings might be an appealing undertaking. but in the long run it will be unsuccessful in removing Donald Trump from office and will detract from the important work of reversing the damage he has done. Since there’s little likelihood a finding 67 senators who will vote for conviction, it would simply be a “feel good” activity.
It may seem simple to distinguish criminal conduct from bad policy decisions. But it’s not as straightforward as it seems. Illegal and harmful are not simply interchangeable ideas.
Bribery, obstruction of justice, and corruption obviously require criminal investigation. It will not be possible to investigate everything at once. Congress should prioritize criminal investigations based on the seriousness of the harm done to the public not on what would make the biggest splash on the 6:00 news.
Abuses of government authority may violate constitutional or administrative law while not resulting in any individual criminal liability. There are also actions that may be harmful, discriminatory, economically damaging, or contrary to traditional activity but still are not unlawful. Pursuing a criminal indictment against behavior that is not clearly unlawful runs the risk of tainting the entire investigative process, ultimately accomplishing little, and emboldening future bad actors with the idea if they can “get away with it”.
It is important at the beginning to establish that officials who have violated criminal statutes cannot claim immunity from prosecution simply because they were pursuing political objectives or operating under the orders of government officials. We need to strongly invalidate the “I was only following orders” defense.
I won’t attempt to list the number of things that Congress needs to undertake to repair all the damage that’s been done to this country. Many of the political and institutional problems exposed during the Trump administration are not necessarily new. There have been longstanding tensions between presidential authority over federal bureaucracy and immigration policy and the role of congressional oversight. We’ve also seen increasing politicization of judicial review and law enforcement.
But I believe one thing is important: we must not only repair the damage that’s been done but we must perform an analysis of how a single administration was able to undermine years of government procedure and policy so that we can ensure that safeguards are in place to prevent it from ever happening again.
Congress should pursue a two-track program running in unison to examine both personal accountability and systemic reform. Congress needs to be careful not to make promises beyond their ability to deliver. The Democrats do not have a veto proof majority and attempting to reach beyond what they can expect to accomplish may undermine their entire program.
This is not about one president or one administration, and it is not an either-or choice. We need to do both. If done properly, we could emerge with an even stronger constitutional system with stronger checks and balances and a greater ability to serve the public.
Accountability or Restoration? The Dilemma Facing Democrats
By John Turley
On November 10, 2026
In Commentary, Politics
It is tempting to imagine Donald Trump, his sons, and the rest of his administration standing in the dock answering criminal charges. It would be satisfying, but a waste of time, considering the amount of work needed to repair the damage that he has done to this country. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be held responsible; I’m saying that repair and restoration should come before revenge.
I know some of you are thinking “It’s not revenge, it’s justice.” I agree that justice needs to be done, but it should be deliberate, fact-based justice, not the weaponized justice of the Trump administration. More importantly, it should not detract from the important work of rebuilding public faith in our government and restoring important programs that have been destroyed.
The Democrats message should be first that they’re going to make the government work for the people again and that they will provide remedies where the law allows. At the same time, they must assure the public that where there is credible evidence of wrongdoing there will be a proper and independent investigation. They must state that no one gets immunity because they are powerful or wealthy and likewise that no one loses their constitutional rights because they are unpopular.
The guiding principle should be that they will not sacrifice justice for the appearance of reconciliation and will not sacrifice the public’s welfare for the satisfaction of punishment. They will repair injuries, establish responsibility in a fair manner, and make it harder for anyone else to abuse government powers.
We must also hold the members of the Trump administration accountable to send a message to future political leaders that such behavior is not tolerable. It is important to recognize the difference between illegal behavior and bad policy. The Congress should concentrate on repairing bad policy but should at the same time put in place the procedures for punishing crimes. Special prosecutors and revived inspectors general would be the most reasonable method of pursuing the legal avenues.
Convening impeachment hearings might be an appealing undertaking. but in the long run it will be unsuccessful in removing Donald Trump from office and will detract from the important work of reversing the damage he has done. Since there’s little likelihood a finding 67 senators who will vote for conviction, it would simply be a “feel good” activity.
It may seem simple to distinguish criminal conduct from bad policy decisions. But it’s not as straightforward as it seems. Illegal and harmful are not simply interchangeable ideas.
Bribery, obstruction of justice, and corruption obviously require criminal investigation. It will not be possible to investigate everything at once. Congress should prioritize criminal investigations based on the seriousness of the harm done to the public not on what would make the biggest splash on the 6:00 news.
Abuses of government authority may violate constitutional or administrative law while not resulting in any individual criminal liability. There are also actions that may be harmful, discriminatory, economically damaging, or contrary to traditional activity but still are not unlawful. Pursuing a criminal indictment against behavior that is not clearly unlawful runs the risk of tainting the entire investigative process, ultimately accomplishing little, and emboldening future bad actors with the idea if they can “get away with it”.
It is important at the beginning to establish that officials who have violated criminal statutes cannot claim immunity from prosecution simply because they were pursuing political objectives or operating under the orders of government officials. We need to strongly invalidate the “I was only following orders” defense.
I won’t attempt to list the number of things that Congress needs to undertake to repair all the damage that’s been done to this country. Many of the political and institutional problems exposed during the Trump administration are not necessarily new. There have been longstanding tensions between presidential authority over federal bureaucracy and immigration policy and the role of congressional oversight. We’ve also seen increasing politicization of judicial review and law enforcement.
But I believe one thing is important: we must not only repair the damage that’s been done but we must perform an analysis of how a single administration was able to undermine years of government procedure and policy so that we can ensure that safeguards are in place to prevent it from ever happening again.
Congress should pursue a two-track program running in unison to examine both personal accountability and systemic reform. Congress needs to be careful not to make promises beyond their ability to deliver. The Democrats do not have a veto proof majority and attempting to reach beyond what they can expect to accomplish may undermine their entire program.
This is not about one president or one administration, and it is not an either-or choice. We need to do both. If done properly, we could emerge with an even stronger constitutional system with stronger checks and balances and a greater ability to serve the public.