Throughout much of his life, Donald J. Trump has viewed the world through the lens of whether he or people he favors are being treated “unfairly.”
As the 45th president of the United States and a wealthy businessman with influential connections, Mr. Trump has frequently used the term “unfairly” in various situations.
He often claims that news outlets, political adversaries, critics, and prosecutors handling his legal matters are treating him in an unfair manner.
In 2017, Mr. Trump asserted, “No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly. You can’t let them discourage you. Don’t allow critics and naysayers to hinder your aspirations.”
This sense of grievance was a key factor in his appeal to voters during primary races, the 2016 general election, and his attempts to challenge the results of the 2020 election.
Currently, the issue of fairness, particularly how individuals perceive Mr. Trump’s treatment by prosecutors and their ability to impartially judge him, is central to the meticulous jury selection process for his first criminal trial. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are in the process of selecting 12 jurors from a large pool to determine whether Mr. Trump manipulated business records to conceal a payment during the 2016 presidential campaign.
At the beginning of jury selection, over 50 potential jurors expressed doubts about their impartiality, emphasizing the importance of fairness in the trial where Mr. Trump, like any defendant, is presumed innocent until proven guilty. As the selection process continues, more individuals are being excused due to uncertainties about their ability to be fair.
While reminders about fairness are customary in criminal trials, the involvement of Mr. Trump adds a political dimension to the proceedings.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass emphasized to potential jurors that the case was not a judgment on their personal feelings towards Mr. Trump but a matter of law, acknowledging the widespread opinions surrounding the case.
During the selection process, Mr. Trump’s lead attorney, Todd Blanche, sought to assess the jurors’ claims of impartiality towards his client. He acknowledged the diverse opinions individuals hold about Mr. Trump based on various factors.
One juror resisted disclosing his political beliefs, affirming that his opinion of Mr. Trump would not impact his ability to serve as a fair juror.
To another potential juror, Blanche aimed to ensure a neutral starting point for Mr. Trump’s case.
One woman initially stated, “nobody’s above the law,” but later admitted to believing that Mr. Trump was being treated fairly. She ultimately expressed uncertainty about her impartiality and was excused from the jury pool.
