The 65 Project, a leftist nonprofit organization with ties to influential representatives of the Democratic Party, has been utilizing millions of dollars to discredit and disbar over one-hundred attorneys who were part of President Donald Trump’s election lawsuits. This project is currently operating in 26 states across America, and targeting key battlegrounds such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan Nevada Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
The 65 Project’s aims to prevent conservative lawyers from challenging elections results in the future by pushing for regulations that effectively prohibit certain electoral contests in the future – including upcoming midterms in 2022. The most recent target of this mission was Linda Kerns and Bruce Marks, two attorneys representing President Trump’s election complaints in Pennsylvania.
This flagrant attempt to tear down civil political disagreement is an example of what can happen when partisan politics become more important than the legality or legitimacy of a cause. It is difficult enough for individuals to hold their political representatives accountable within the existing legal structures without them being threatened by a powerful lobby group like the 65 Project. Many legal experts are concerned about how this kind of behavior could set a dangerous precedent for other organizations seeking to silence opposition through intimidation and harassment.
Not only does this conflict stand against free speech and undermine faith in our democracy but it would also have long-lasting effects on our economy. A majority of attorney’s fees come from resolving disputes between businesses or individuals; forcing lawyers out of practice will have severe economic consequences that will affect everyone regardless of their political views. Additionally, this type of action will only create further division between parties as citizens become increasingly distrustful towards each other rather than their elected officials who should be held accountable instead.
The continued success of our democracy relies upon all citizens being able to voice their opinions without fear or oppression from outside entities; attempts like those made by the 65 Project are not only unethical but they serve to corrode public trust even further than what presently exists across both sides of the aisle. This initiative should be carefully monitored with an eye towards protecting freedom-of-speech on all sides lest we risk losing much more than just our ability to express ourselves civilly at the polls – we may end up losing faith itself in our government, its institutions and its actors alike.
