Let’s get real about Donald Trump’s argument that his trial is interfering with his ability to campaign and run for office. The President of the United States is a job. The political campaign for President is the equivalent of the job application and interviews for the job.
So let’s consider what a defendant in the process of applying for a different job, say president of a university, would face under similar circumstances. Would the courts and justice system defer that person’s trial until after the university had made its decision? Would they change trial dates because the defendant was a finalist and had job interviews that conflicted with the trial dates? Would they let the defendant make veiled public threats to the courts, the prosecutors, the witnesses, and the jury along with their family members and not hold him accountable? The answer of course is no.
Now let’s consider the more common everyday case, a defendant who already has a job. Would the courts allow that person special privileges because the work time they miss due to the trial might (or will) cause them to lose the job they already have? Again, the answer is no. In fact, for too many, if the defendant cannot come up with bail while waiting trial to determine their actual guilt they will be confined to jail even when that means they will lose their jobs as a result.
Anyone who meets the minimum criteria to run for President has the right to apply for the job. However, that should not mean that in the legal system they then should have rights that would not be given to anyone being considered for any other job, even it they are a finalist for the position. If a Grand Jury has pondered the evidence and determined there is a reasonable likelihood of criminal guilt then the rules should be the same regardless of what job the defendant is applying for.
Trump is correct that in his case there appears to be a two tiered justice system. He also is correct when he says he is not being given the “same advantages” as others who have been indicted for similar crimes. Where he is wrong is when he asserts that he is being given fewer advantages than others. In fact, he has been given way more advantages than any other indicted defendant has ever been given, or should be given.
The President of the United States is a job. Trump is an apparent finalist for that job. If the criminal trial resulting from a Grand Jury indictment interferes with his job interviews (campaign rallies) that is his problem not the court’s problem. While there is a right for any eligible person to run for President, there is no right in the Constitution or U.S. law that gives a candidate for President special privileges as a defendant in a criminal trial. Period.
One final point. Just like when applying for other jobs, the applicant does not have a right to be awarded that job. But that is another trial.