Marine Le Pen’s going to jail.

Not really. But she was sentenced to jail on Monday by a criminal court in Paris, where France’s predominant political figure was found guilty of embezzlement in connection with allegations the National Rally improperly diverted millions in European Parliament funds over more than a decade.

Nobody cares about the money. I mean, I’m sure someone does, but this is really about the rule of law in France. The case against Le Pen, and the debate about how, and even whether, to prosecute a norm-breaking political figure in pole position for the presidency, mirrors America’s experience with Donald Trump.

The allegations against Le Pen are the furtherest thing from a secret. Long story short, she was accused of skimming money from Brussels to replenish RN’s depleted bank accounts. The court described Le Pen as the “central” figure in what, by the end of it, was a €5 million racket. So… she’s a mob boss, basically. Allegedly.

Again (and with a chuckle), none of that’s new information. By and large, voters don’t care. Or I guess I should say RN voters don’t care, just the same as Republicans in the US don’t care if Trump runs his personal life, his businesses and also the United States, like a crime family.

The rule of law isn’t just a key pillar of democracy, it’s the foundation. If you don’t have the rule of law, the rest of it’s irrelevant. For example, if Trump’s efforts to cow America’s attorneys and law firms are successful, he’ll have carte blanche to suppress the vote during the mid-terms, knowing lawyers won’t risk representing Democrats in election-related litigation. I could go on. There are countless examples demonstrating the extent to which every facet of democracy in America (and everywhere else it still exists) depends on the rule of law.

But most voters have a less nuanced view. For a majority, democracy is just, “Can I go out and cast a ballot for the guy or gal I like?” If not, it’s not democracy, even when the rule of law requires (demands) that guy or gal be disqualified. That’s a flawed conception of democracy, but everyone’s not a political scientist, so voters will be forgiven for feeling disenfranchised in cases where their preferred candidate’s forbidden from contesting office.

That paradox works to the advantage of those seeking to usurp the rule of law. They can claim that whatever their transgressions against democratic norms, they can’t possibly be any more antithetical to the precepts of representative government than a ban from political participation.

To ban Trump from office for running roughshod over American democracy is to make him a martyr for that same democracy, a maddeningly vexing quandary which France now faces in Le Pen’s embezzlement case. In addition to a four-year prison sentence (half of which was suspended, the other half can be served on modified house arrest, which I assume means she’ll be allowed to carry out her parliamentary duties and preside as godmother over the RN family), Le Pen’s conviction came with a five-year ban on seeking new public office.

She’ll appeal, but for now, Le Pen’s ineligible for the 2027 French presidential election. That’s problematic because she’s the front-runner, and her supporters are quite likely to take to the streets if she’s not allowed on the ballot.

Recall that 2024 was a turbulent year for Emmanuel Macron, who gambled on a snap legislative election after RN put up a dominant performance in elections for European Parliament. Initially, that gamble looked like a mistake, when RN replicated their EU legislative performance in the first round of voting for France’s national parliament. But in the second round, a coalition of the willing, so to speak, came together to dilute RN’s seat count.

That wasn’t the end of it, though. RN still came away as the largest single party, making Le Pen a powerbroker without equal. This is an oversimplification, but at any given time, she can instruct RN to play spoiler to anything, including and especially fraught attempts to negotiate France’s budget.

I’m not an expert on the mechanics here, but in the event there’s another snap parliamentary vote, Monday’s ruling appears to suggest Le Pen wouldn’t be able to run, and if Macron were to resign (e.g., if Le Pen were to topple his government, making his presidency seem even more untenable in the eyes of the French electorate than it already does), she wouldn’t be able to contest the presidency.

If that’s mostly correct, this is a Reservoir Dogs-style standoff. Under the current ruling, Le Pen would be barred from the National Assembly if it’s dissolved again (because she can’t run for new office) and if Macron resigns, she can’t run to replace him. So if she wants to retain an official position as France’s powerbroker (as opposed to pulling the strings from house arrest, a comically literal manifestation of the mafia analogue), she can’t let the government fall.

If Macron forces her out (I think he can call another snap vote once enough time’s elapsed since last year’s) or, even more dramatic, if he resigns before she can appeal so that France can’t elect her to replace him at the Élysée, RN voters will presumably start burning things. Things like cities.

After the ruling Monday, Viktor Orban took to social media with a melodramatic lament, declaring, “Je suis Marine!” Jordan Bardella was likewise histrionic. “It’s French democracy that’s being executed,” he said. Russia agrees. The French courts, the Kremlin said, have committed “a violation of democratic norms.” (That’s — umm — pretty f-cking rich coming from Vladimir Putin.)

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, apparently feeling empathetic towards a fellow firebrand despite residing on the polar opposite end of the political spectrum, said “the decision to remove an elected official should be up to the people.” Sacha Houlié posed a simple question: “Is our society really so sick that we’re going to take offense at what is no more and no less than the rule of law?”

For her part, a disgusted Le Pen muttered “Incredible,” on her way out of the court room.