This is a blog about the ethics of writing. But the stunning political consequences in the 2024 Presidential election is a sui generis reality—we have elected a convicted felon to be the forty-seventh President of the United States. Donald J. Trump will serve as both our Commander-In-Chief and our Felon-In-Chief. Understanding this calls for both context and consequence.
Criminal Law
Contrary to common belief, our criminal laws do not prohibit the federal government from hiring a convicted felon as president.[1] The government can hire or appoint someone to a government job or position who has a criminal record. But there are exceptions.
Convicted felons are eligible to apply for most federal jobs. Some applicants may not be eligible for because specific statutes or laws prohibit employment depending on the crime committed. “Certain federal laws, like those prohibiting treason, carry with them a lifelong ban on federal employment. Other federal laws prohibit federal employment for a certain number of years. The Bond Amendment imposes restrictions related to national security positions. People convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes under Federal or State law are ‘prohibited from employment in any position requiring the individual: to ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms or ammunition.’[2]
For most federal jobs, questions about criminal history don’t appear on the initial job application. But upon actual employment applicants are required to complete a Declaration for Federal Employment. The must also undergo a background investigation to establish suitability or fitness for employment. The federal government decides whether the applicant is suitable based on these requirements: (1) Your character traits and conduct. (2) Potential conflicts between the applicant’s criminal conduct and the core job duties required. (3) Potential conflicts between your employment and interests of national security. (4) The nature, seriousness, and circumstance of the applicant’s criminal activity. (5) How long it’s been since the applicant’s criminal activity took place. (6) Rehabilitation or efforts toward rehabilitation.[3]
However, 29 U.S.C. & 504 prohibits people convicted of certain crimes from being employed or serving in specified prohibited capacities, including as labor union officials, corporate employees engaged in labor-management relations, and as labor relations consultants. The statute applies only to labor unions and employers in the private sector of the economy regulated by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 401, et seq.
The felony offense in 29 U.S.C. § 1111 prohibits people convicted of certain crimes from being employed or serving in specified prohibited capacities related to employee pension or welfare benefit plans regulated by title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and as consultants to such plans.[4] Convicted individuals are disqualified automatically by operation of both statutes upon sentencing.
Race, Employment, & the Civil Rights Act
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has historically taken the position that an employer’s policy or practice of excluding individuals from employment because they have criminal conviction records is unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 unless the policy or practice is justified by a business necessity.
The EEOC’s position is based on statistics showing that African-Americans and Hispanics are convicted at a rate disproportionately greater than their representation in the population which, in the EEOC’s view, means that employment decisions based on criminal conviction records have an adverse impact on African-Americans and Hispanics. “Adverse impact discrimination” is defined as a “substantially different rate of selection in hiring, promotion, or other employment decision which works to the disadvantage of members of a race, sex, or ethnic group.”[5]
Some states require that employers weigh other factors. Often, a conviction that occurred many years ago should not be allowed to figure as heavily on a hiring decision as a conviction that happened recently. Also, the employer sometimes must consider the seriousness of the crime committed and whether or not it has any relation to the job.
Jobs that require a license such as teachers, lawyers and doctors, may be forbidden to felons. But it is not a blanket prohibition. Some felons have also obtained employment in these fields and others through obtaining a pardon. Pardons are granted at the state level by the governor while federal crimes must be pardoned by the president.[6]
The Office of the President of the United States
There are only a few requirements to serve as U.S. president. The U.S. Constitution allows anyone who is at least 35 years old, a natural-born citizen of the United States and a U.S. resident for at least 14 years is eligible to be elected president. Because the Constitution does not mention criminal records, a person indicted or convicted of a felony would not be barred from serving in the role if he or she meets the other requirements.
Because presidential requirements are written in the U.S. Constitution, Congress cannot add more restrictions without amending the Constitution. A constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and ratification by three-fourths of the country’s state legislatures.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding public office — unless that prohibition is overridden by a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress. The clause was written after the U.S. Civil War and does not mention other crimes.[7] Until recently, the only felon to even run for president was Eugene Debs who famously ran for election from a jail cell in the 1920 election.
Until Trump’s conviction of a felony on May 31, 2024, no president had ever been convicted of a felony. President Richard Nixon was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in 1974 for his role in the Watergate scandal but was never charged with a crime. He resigned from office before impeachment proceedings against him began and was later pardoned by President Gerald Ford. Presidents Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump have all been impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives but acquitted by the Senate. The impeachments were not criminal charges.[8]
On May 30, 2024, the former president was found guilty of thirty-four felony counts of falsifying business records relating to a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels by Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, before the 2016 presidential election. Trump is appealing the verdict.[9] His sentencing was scheduled for July 11, 2024, but continued because he was running for president.
On July 1, 2024, the United States Supreme Court gave Trump a pass. The court held: “Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.”[10]
Many believe him to be unethical, because he consistently and insistently violated the four ethical imperatives in political campaigns. 1. Avoid mudslinging. Campaign civility has shifted in the Trump era. Dirty campaigning, which includes tactics like name-calling, belittling opponents, and incivility, is becoming de rigueur. 2. Prioritize truth. He didn’t. 3. Clarity over confusion. He is the past master of chaos. 4. Transparent campaign financing. The 2024 U.S. presidential election campaign saw megadonors pour in billions of dollars. The 50 largest individual donors contributed US$1.5 billion to political action committees and other interest groups supporting candidates on both sides. Critics have argued that the growing disconnect between politicians and their constituents is partly due to campaign finance systems. In the U.S., rules allow a small number of wealthy donors to make large contributions. So-called Super PACs — political action committees — can only finance independent expenditures and independent political activity. The funds do not go to political candidates, which raises serious concerns about transparency.[11]
Political Ethics—An Oxymoron?
“Political ethics requires leaders to meet higher standards than would be necessary for private life. They may have less of a right to privacy than ordinary citizens do, or no right to use their office for personal profit. Personal morality and political morality are often viewed as a conflict of interest. Both individuals in the political domain as an authority and as active civic participants can have these values bleed through to the personal sector of morality. An individual who learned the skills necessary in the political sector may apply these learned qualities in a setting outside of politics, often viewed as a private everyday setting. In contrast, one who is entering the political setting may have already held the qualities and virtues that are expected in the professional setting. The values already held by individuals will then be applied to the new political setting. Those who have emerged into the political sphere can benefit from knowing that virtues and morals can be influential prior to entering.”[12]
To offset ethics, critics argue that ethics has no place in politics.[13] If politicians are to be effective in the real world, they cannot be bound by moral rules and must pursue the national interest. However, if politicians are asked to justify their claims, they will almost always appeal to moral principles of their own to show that ethics is harmful or counterproductive.[14]
At the end of the day, we should remember Jane Austen, Mark Twain, and P.J. O’Rourke.
In Jane Austen’s “Guide to Good Manners: Compliments, Charades & Horrible Blunders,” she focuses on etiquette and social behavior in the early 1800s. “It’s very difficult for the prosperous to be humble,” she said, and “Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance.” In the 20th century a rather less genteel form sprouted, such as Dorothy Parker’s remark upon the death of the dour President Calvin Coolidge: “How could they tell?”
Nineteenth-century wit Mark Twain, who responded to grave rumors of illness by writing “The report of my death was an exaggeration,” had as high an opinion of Congress then as most Americans do now. “Reader,” he once wrote, “suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
In 2016. P.J. O’Rourke wrote a book titled How the Hell Did This Happen? He said some terms mean one thing to Republicans and another to Democrats. For example: “Right-wing talk radio and Fox News” stand in as “accurate and truthful reporting” to a conservative, while a liberal might define it as “the voices people hear when they aren’t taking their meds.”[15]
From my perspective, ethics is our system of moral principles that helps people make decisions and live their lives. It’s moral philosophy and focuses largely on what’s morally right and wrong, good and bad. Putting a felon in the oval office is unethical. But then, ethics and politics are like ice cream and bacon. They both taste good. Democrats like ice cream because it’s soothing. Republicans like bacon because it’s agitating.
[1] https://help.usajobs.gov/faq/application/eligibility/ex-offender#:~:text=Yes%2C%20you%20can%20work%20for,however%20there%20are%20some%20exceptions.
[2] Public Law 1-4-208 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997.
[3] https://help.usajobs.gov/faq/application/eligibility/ex-offender#:~:text=Yes%2C%20you%20can%20work%20for,however%20there%20are%20some%20exceptions.
[4] See 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq.
[5] https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/can-you-refuse-to-hire-a-felon.html
[6] https://thelawdictionary.org/article/mployment-rights-of-convicted-felons/
[7] https://www.voanews.com/a/can-felons-serve-in-us-elected-federal-offices-/7014217.html
[8] https://www.voanews.com/a/can-felons-serve-in-us-elected-federal-offices-/7014217.html
[9] https://apnews.com/article/trump-trial-deliberations-jury-testimony-verdict-85558c6d08efb434d05b694364470aa0
[10] Trump v. United States, No. 23-939, on certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. 603 U.S. 593.
[11] https://theconversation.com/do-campaign-ethics-still-matter-in-the-age-of-donald-trump-237304
[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ethics
[13] Korab-Karpowicz, W. Julian. “Political Realism in International Relations,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010 edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
[14] Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations (Basic Books, 1977), pp. 4-13. ISBN 978-0465037070
[15] https://whyy.org/articles/essay-the-decline-of-political-wit-and-the-death-of-the-stylish-insult/
I am an author and a part-time lawyer with a focus on ethics and professional discipline. I teach creative writing and ethics to law students at Arizona State University. Read my bio.
If you have an important story you want told, you can commission me to write it for you. Learn how.
I am an author and a part-time lawyer with a focus on ethics and professional discipline. I teach creative writing and ethics to law students at Arizona State University. 
My latest novel is Hide & Be. 
If you have an important story you want told, you can commission me to write it for you. 