The impeachment inquiry and avoiding the “gray area”

By Jasper Gleeson, ‘20

Trump and his aides have refused to testify. Illustration by Jasper Gleeson ‘20.

Age demographics are often seen in nationwide polls: 18 to 29-year-olds, 30 to 49-year-olds, 50 to 64-year-olds, and 65 years and above. But getting a grasp on what high schoolers think is a far more difficult and subjective process. They aren’t included in these polls.

When high school students aren’t educated enough on a given issue, they fall into a “gray area,” where a specific conclusion can’t be drawn because they don’t feel confident in their understanding of the problem. In my interviewing process, I found that this “gray area” was highly common.

Engaging in conversation with peers is core to the philosophy of Catlin Gabel School (CGS). However, through an investigation of students’ outlook on the presidential impeachment inquiry, it was made clear that more opportunities for deliberation and debate of current issues are necessary, would offer much-needed clarity for the student body and connect them directly with the outside world.

Members of the Catlin Gabel School (CGS) community were initially sought out to offer their opinion on the impeachment inquiry.

“My view on the impeachment inquiry is moderate,” said CGS junior Sophia Meneakis. “I think impeachment is something I’m in favor of, but I also know that there would be innumerable consequences that would come along with the aftermath of an impeachment.”

“I’m drawn towards impeachment but I’m worried about the violence that could come afterward,” said Meneakis.  “I’m really concerned about how that would affect minorities and demographics that have tended to suffer over the course of the Trump presidency.”

CGS senior Li Lambert describes himself as politically moderate. Having been involved in Mock Trial and Junior State of America (JSA) for the majority of his high school career, he describes himself as having an “above-average political engagement.” 

“The conservatives will see it as a witch hunt, and the Democrats will see it as a driving force behind their politics, and nothing will come of it,” said Lambert.

In Lambert’s mind, impeachment isn’t worth pursuing because of the potential harm to the United States’ political climate. 

“It’ll just end up dividing America more— specifically into those who believe [impeachment] to be necessary and those who believe it’s something propped up by the Democrats as a political ploy,” said Lambert. 

Peter Shulman’s history and social studies classes at CGS focus on a thorough understanding of issues, rather than pressure towards a concrete conclusion. 

“In class when we’ve talked about [the impeachment inquiry], the discussion hasn’t been ‘What is your conclusion?” said Shulman. “It’s been ‘How can we understand it?’”

Shulman even paused his curriculum as the impeachment inquiry began to discuss it and help his students to understand the issue.

This style of learning emphasizes a critical lens and a complete consideration of what has led to problems like the impeachment inquiry, creating a deeper understanding and a thorough conclusion. 

“We haven't jumped to saying ‘absolutely yes’ and ‘absolutely no.’ I don’t really know what [my students] think,” said Shulman.

Shulman takes this approach simply because the issue is so nuanced. 

“It’s fairly complicated. It’s not quite as clear as, you know, ‘People broke into Watergate and there’s obvious obstruction of justice,’” said Shulman.“I’ve just been more focused on helping people to understand it, and there’ll be time to come to greater conclusions.”

Shulman’s academic philosophy, one of inquiry and consideration rather than judgment, is a mindset which reflects that of the broader CGS community. With “inquiry” as one of the school’s core values, it seems that many students at CGS have learned to entirely understand the issue, rather than come to a definitive conclusion.

Members of the journalism class at Lincoln High School commented on student perspectives of the impeachment inquiry as well as their perceptions of the political climate at the school.

Cass Biles, a senior journalist at Lincoln High School, commented on the political climate at her school. In her eyes, the school’s community is “hyper left-wing.”

“We have people who are self-proclaimed communists, we have Antifa. We have a huge left community and a lot of Trump haters. I think we are more polarized than most Portland high schools in that sense,” Biles said.

On the political spectrum, Biles is moderate. 

“I have left-wing and right-wing ideologies, authoritarian and libertarian ideologies,” she said.

Biles also commented on how the “polarized” political climate of Lincoln High School leads those with right-wing or moderate political beliefs to be marginalized by the community. 

“I felt bad for all the kids who were pro-Trump coming to school after election day,” she said.

Sara Blodgett, also a senior journalist at Lincoln High School, agreed with Biles’ take on the political climate at Lincoln. 

“If you align with right-wing stances, we don’t accept that or talk about it,” said Blodgett. “If they do talk about it, then they are shut down immediately, which has been my experience, as well as for some of my friends.”

In regards to impeachment, Blodgett said that most of the high school is in favor of impeachment. 

“The majority of the school is very anti-Trump,” she said. 

Blodgett also expressed frustration at the fact that at Lincoln High School, and for many high school students, there isn’t enough clarity and conversation around the issue of impeachment to derive a true conclusion. 

“At Lincoln, and in general, I don’t think kids are educated enough about impeachment to have a true stance,” she said. “I feel like this is why so many people are in the ‘gray area’— we just don’t know enough.”

Blodgett’s definition of the “gray area” falls right in line with Shulman’s. To him, a “gray area” would be a neutral “I’m not sure how I feel.” When students are less educated on an issue, they fall into this “gray area.”

In Shulman’s eyes, however, when one weighs both sides of the issue in order to draw a more complicated conclusion, this isn’t just “I’m not sure”— it is a calculation of the issue’s nuances.

“I don’t think that being neither pro-impeachment nor anti-impeachment implies a ‘gray area.’ A true gray area would be ‘I don't know if it’s impeachable, or I’m not sure what I think about it,’” said Shulman. “But the idea that it’s impeachable yet politically unwise is a product of people considering real-world consequences.”

The majority of young people are pro-impeachment, consistent with the overall trend in the U.S. at the moment. A Nov. 2019 poll of America’s 18 to 29-year-olds conducted by Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics found that 52% of young Americans firmly believe President Trump should be impeached. FiveThirtyEight’s national polling found that 47.8% of Americans are in support of impeachment, while 45.8% aren’t in support.

Helene Stockton, who graduated from CGS in 2019 and currently attends Oberlin College, is pro-impeachment. In her eyes, President Trump’s removal from office is necessary to uphold America’s morals. 

“I support impeachment because impeachment as put into the constitution is a way of safeguarding the position for the presidency,” said Stockton. “As president, in some ways, you’re untouchable, but impeachment is a way of saying this person isn’t upholding the pillars of democracy or our expectations of that office.”

Stockton refuted the notion of a “moderate” opinion on impeachment, saying that if Trump isn’t impeached, this sets a new standard— the President can break laws and get away with it.

“I understand why some people on the left are opposed to impeachment. I, too, used to be focused on that. But if we don't impeach [Trump], we are setting a precedent that it is okay for a president to blatantly break laws and lie,” said Stockton. “We can’t set the precedent that an American president can hijack democracy.”

Shulman agreed with this notion. “I think enabling the lawlessness of the administration is a very bad thing in the long run,” he said.

In Stockton’s eyes, and in the eyes of many students in the CGS community, more opportunities to simply talk, debate, and mull over current issues would build a valuable understanding of the surrounding world, allowing students to more readily come to their own conclusions. 

“The last class I’ve had which really talked about today’s issues and controversies was Human Crossroads freshman year,” said CGS senior Will Swan.

Politically engaged youth crave a forum in which to talk about current issues. In general, when youth don’t have a venue to share their opinions in the classroom or feel like they aren’t being heard, protests like the Climate Strike and the March for Our Lives rallies are a perfect opportunity to amplify one’s voice.

Many students feel that a place to converse with peers about pertinent issues is a challenging thing to find.

“I just wish there was a place to talk about all this,” said Lambert.

Ideally, the “gray area” could be avoided by providing more venues for high school students to converse and share their voices. At CGS, this could mean implementing discussions of current issues into the curriculum.

So much information on the impeachment inquiry is being released every day that it’s hard to keep up with the front-page articles each week. But space to speak about impeachment— and current issues like it— would clarify the issue and invite much-needed conversation.