"President Clinton's misconduct--lying about an illicit sexual affair--is deplorable and indefensible but it's not impeachable," Sandel said. "Tawdry though itis, it doesn't undermine the basic structure ofgovernment or the constitutional order."

Benhabib says the legitimacy of the Starrinvestigation is further clouded by the ambiguousprivate status of the President outside of hispolitical office.

"One of the tragic things about the Starrreport is the fact the ordinary rights of privacythat would have been granted any ordinary citizencould not have been invoked by President Clintonbecause of his position," she says.

According to Benhabib, if Clinton's affair hadinvolved the violation of national security--forinstance, if Lewinsky had been a "Russianspy"--Starr's investigation might have been moreappropriate.

Benhabib says she was particularly struck byStarr's ability to subpoena family members totestify against one another in a non-criminalcase.

"These are tactics of totalitarian societies,"she says. "It does create fear in people and itdoes create lack of trust."

Morton J. Horwitz, Warren professor of Americanlegal history, says he believes Starr's aggressiveprosecutorial tactics will lead to an expansion ofprivacy law.

"I think most people were really surprised athow far a prosecutor can go in delving into theprivate lives of people," he says.

"One of the things which shocked me most washearing prosecutors say over and over again thatthis is what prosecutors do all the time."

As a result of such concerns, Horwitz said heexpects privacy laws to expand in the areas ofwiretapping, computer and internet privacy andlimits on grand jury questioning.

But he adds that executive privilege, a currentpoint of contention among legal scholars, might gountouched.

"I think Clinton has, in the short run,discredited [executive privilege]arguments...[because] people think he used sucharguments to cover up bad behavior," Horwitz says.

The Moral of the Story

In addition to debating the legalities ofPresident Clinton's actions and the pursuantinvestigation, some scholars are raising moreelusive moral questions.

Ann Pellegrini '86, assistant professor ofEnglish who teaches Women's Studies 101:"Introduction to Women's Studies: Changing theSubject," says she worries that "discussing theLewinsky scandal under the rubric of sexualharassment leaves the door open to criminalizingsex and sexuality which do not conform to'traditional family values,' whatever those are."

Benhabib says society has morally judgedPresident Clinton even though he may have donenothing legally wrong.