Author: Danielle Levy

When Roman Polanski, the director who admitted to the statutory rape of a 13 years old 32 years ago, filed for his case to be dismissed on the ground of judicial misconduct (for which there exists at least some evidence), the Second District Court of Appeals suggested that he request to be sentenced in absentia. Legal experts say that the court is pointing to a way for the case to be resolved without Polanski having to serve another day in jail. The 3 members court in a 70 pages ruling said, “We exhort all participants in this extended drama to place the integrity of the criminal justice system above the desire to punish any one individual, whether for his offense or for his fight.” There are those who will want Polanski punished no matter what, just as there are those who tend to want a given accused or convict punished regardless. Yet, if the justices’ argument holds any importance, those objections can be countermanded, for rare is the instance where the integrity of the criminal justice system does not trump the individual. Those who may not like the result when that principle is exercised may want to remember that the rule of law is more important than the individual because the rule of law is one of the things that gives our culture a modicum of wisdom.

Yesterday I sat for hours in the halls of Los Angeles County Family Court while giving support to a friend there for her grandchildren since they were being removed from their mother’s custody. The halls were full, with just about every seat taken. I looked at the people, ordinary faces, no great anything stood out, no great beauty, no great ugliness, they looked as ordinary as any group could. Yet, some among them were offenders, had abused or neglected children. Others were there like us picking up the pieces and taking care of the children others had in some way hurt. The thing was, it wasn’t possible to tell who was who. Looks alone didn’t give any clue.
Today I read an article about Kaing Guek Eav, a 67 year old former Khmer Rouge member known as Duch who had been in charge of a notorious Phnom Penh prison and who is being tried for his crimes. The author compared him to Adolf Eichmann, the former Nazi put on trial by Israel in the 60’s, since both were not only ordinary people, they also looked ordinary.
What it all said to me was that evil may look ordinary, and that’s something many already know, but what we often forget is that good too looks just as ordinary.

College campuses, especially in Florida, are engaged in a new movement, fighting for the right of students who are here illegally for a number of years to stay in the U.S. They have been organizing formally and in some cases demonstrating. United We Dream is an example, it is a network of current and former such students. Carlos Saavedra, its national coordinator, describes the issue this way, “maybe our parents feel like immigrants, but we feel like Americans because we have been raised here on American values.” Being here illegally, such students are subject to any of the laws and problems of others also here without proper documentation.
Many legal immigrants come to the United States for a better life, motivated by economic rather than philosophical reasons. Many still feel an allegiance to their home country and some do not choose citizenship because their status as legal immigrants enables them to better enjoy the benefits of both countries.
As we decide what to do with these young students who may be deported unless laws are changed, we need to ask ourselves: Who’s the better American, who will make the better citizen, someone who already has a stake in the country, or someone whose allegiance is based on self-interest?

President Obama in Oslo to accept his Nobel Peace Prize made a speech in part invoking the notion of just war and defending the U.S.’s fight in Afghanistan on humanitarian grounds. There’s no doubt there’s good in what he said, but still it wasn’t the speech he could have made, the speech some, including me, expected from a Nobel Peace Laureate. He has in the recent past shown courage and foresight in calling for nuclear disarmament, and done so on more than one occasion. If not the most dangerous issue of our time, nuclear weapons are one of the most. What Mr. Obama could have said is: I pledge myself to this cause. As President I will endeavor to do all I can with nuclear powers and with non-nuclear ones to stop their spread and influence and work toward disarmament. And when my time in office ends, I will take this prize money and begin a foundation to continue this work. In fact my wife and partner will join me in making this cause ours and in doing our absolute best to make the world safer from these weapons and all they can do.
Wouldn’t that have been inspiring?