Ad Astra Per Aspera or Nobody Expects the Starfleet Inquisition
See Also: “The Menagerie” (TOS), “Court Martial” (TOS), “The Measure of a Man” (TNG), “The Drumhead” (TNG), “Author, Author” (VOY), “Doctor Bashir, I Presume” (DS9), “Supernova, Part 2” (PRO), ’90s Courtroom Dramedy, (I am purposefully omitting a ton of other episodes because they feel less influential)
Contains strange new worlds?: Sorta? Not really. There’s a cameo in the pre-title sequence.
Title is a florid but entirely literal reference to a big thing in the episode?: Sorta… It’s the Enterprise-era Starfleet Motto, which they talk about a few times.
Weird. Star Trek has had plenty of Courtroom Drama episodes over the years. But this one is very different from all of them, on account of… It’s actually a courtroom drama. We’ve had episodes with courtroom scenes, and we’ve had episodes that center around a trial, but I don’t think there’s ever actually been an episode where the whole of the episode is the process of a courtroom trial. “The Measure of a Man” comes closest, but even there, it’s mostly about the ensemble contemplating their relationship with Data.
Also, as court proceedings go, “The Measure of a Man” is bullshit. I mean, Starfleet declares Data to be property, and then has a trial where his captain is the defense and Riker is the prosecution, on the basis that they took a couple of classes in law school? And the good guys win on the basis of Picard giving an impassioned speech rather than any sort of legal anything.
There’s a DS9 episode about Cardassian courts and an Enterprise episode about Klingon courts, but they’re both not so much about making a legal argument as a philosophical one about how those respective alien judicial systems are broken and corrupt (I rather like the Enterprise one, because it justifies a lot about Klingon culture, establishing that Klingons go through cycles of being a basically functional civilization that frames a wide variety of social interactions as honorable contests of skill, and long periods of being stabby glory-hounds. Also, Archer loses his case and is sentenced to life imprisonment on the inescapable penal colony from Star Trek VI, whereupon everyone just shrugs and bribes the guards to let him escape. I love this because it honestly was kinda easy for Kirk to escape Rura Penthe).
The only time, I think, we see an actual lawyer in a Federation court is “Court Martial” (Nice touch that they brought back the “Stick your hand on this glowing cake pan when you are under oath” device from that, by the way). And, like most of the courtroom episodes, the trial is really more of a structural element; the main part of the story is really the investigation, the gang desperately trying to uncover the truth and find the “real killer”. Of course, finding the “real killer” is only a viable strategy when the accused is not, point of fact, guilty.
Which brings us here, to the most Actually Courtroom Drama-y of Trek courtroom dramas. Because Una is, point of fact, guilty, at the least, of the crime she was initially accused of: falsifying her paperwork. That’s how they getcha. That’s why employment forms have questions on them like, “Do you do drugs?” and “Are you a terrorist?”. Because “They lied on the form” is a very simple and trivial reason to fire someone and very hard to fight, whereas firing someone because in college, they signed up for the campus socialist club because there was a cute boy at the membership table might get you on the wrong end of a wrongful dismissal suit.
Now, the JAG decides to up the ante to sedition, on the surface, as retaliation for Una refusing to go quietly and spare them the embarrassment of a public trial of one of their most decorated officers for violating one of their most racist laws, and that’s a little bit of a stretch. I wouldn’t be surprised, though, if this turns out later to be part of something bigger. Later, when Pasalk takes over and starts building the groundwork to threaten Pike and the rest of the Enterprise crew, he flashes a little but very un-Vulcan smug smile that almost makes me wonder if he’ll turn out to be a deep cover Romulan.
But the real joy of this episode is the legal argument. And also, structurally, how well the episode plays its cards. You have this tension between Una and Neera – Nera is the best Ilyrian civil rights lawyer in the galaxy, but there’s bad blood with her and Una. The bad blood is because Nera’s cousin was the victim of a hate crime that launched a persecution campaign that led to the ghettoization of Ilyrians on their home colony, and Una’s family evaded that by passing as human. There’s a lot going on there. Last season, I took a little bit of an issue that they’d chosen to tell the story of a persecuted minority who just wanted the freedom to live openly in her own skin through a character played by a Nordic supermodel. Hey, look, Strange New Worlds pays off my faith once again, because that’s basically the tension between Neera and Una. Neera even outright says it: Una has the privilege of being able to pass. Neera, played by not just a black actress, but a darker-skinned black actress, can’t (I kinda wish they had done something visual to show why Neera can’t pass; it seems clear that, yes, she would not choose to if she could, but it seems equally clear that she didn’t consider it even possible). Now, obviously it is a little bit of a cop-out to get Starfleet to make an exception for the Ilyrian who is a decorated officer and a Nordic supermodel whose augmentations aren’t especially scary, while maintaining their codified bigotry against the ones with funny ears or dark skin or X-ray-vision. But the actual history of civil rights in the US tells us that, yeah, you start with the case that’s easiest to make, you take every advantage you get.
So there’s times in the episode where you start to fear that Neera might be planning to throw Una under the bus – that she either thinks the case is unwinnable or worse, thinks that losing would be better for THE CAUSE – and is going to sacrifice Una to bring attention to the plight of Ilyrians. She attacks April on the hypocrisy of his strict adherence to the genetic augmentation laws given his personal history of laxity when it comes to the Prime Directive. (That’s a fun aside. For all that modern fans think of Kirk as this maverick rulebreaker, the canonical TOS Kirk was a very straight-laced military man; the fact that he sometimes broke the rules was not meant to depict him as a rule-breaker by habit, but rather to emphasize how extraordinary the circumstances were. Pike is far more relaxed than Kirk ever was, and he took a wonderfully casual attitude to General Order One on-screen both in “Strange New World”, and back in Discovery. And the incidents Neera mentions draw April as far more flagrant in his violations of the Prime Directive than Kirk ever was. I hope we get some more backstory about April someday.) April is hurt by this badly enough that he’s angry with Pike later, but April also shows a streak of bigotry as he defends the augmentation ban. It could be that, like with La’an, April is still smarting from the personal betrayal of learning that Una lied to him, but if so, that doesn’t come across here.
Speaking of bigotry, there’s a weird scene where Ortegas is bitter about Spock’s casual interactions with Pasalk, and when you combine it with her alternate-future-self getting Stiles’s unfounded suspicion of Spock last season, it makes a pattern I do not want from Ortegas. Don’t make her an asshole. She’s too cool to be an asshole. Fortunately, the scene ends up light and fun when Spock comes over to apologize – not for fraternizing with the enemy, but for his embarrassing lack of decorum in being so “obviously” passive-aggressive toward Pasalk, which went right over Ortegas, but not M’Benga.
One thing that is really interesting, as Neera builds up Una’s backstory for the judges, is how many things they’re doing here. With a presumed-primary-American audience, with Neera mentioning how slavery was once legal, with the deliberate casting of the dark-skinned actor as the Ilyrian who “can’t pass”, you’re primed to view this as a metaphor for the history of racism and Jim Crow. And it is. But it’s not just that. With the angle of Una being closeted, being unable to seek medical treatment, with the threat of even false accusation being deadly, you’re also primed to view this as a metaphor for gay rights and trans rights. And it is. But it’s also not just that either. What surprised me was Una mentioning that in utero genetic augmentation is a religious tradition among her people. That, in order to live on a Federation planet, her people agreed to give up the practice, but some, including her family, continued to practice in secret. What she’s describing is crypto-Judaism, with Ilyrians taking the role of conversos under the inquisition.
I’ve heard from some Jewish fans who are very tired of Star Trek’s various accidental stumblings into the Space Jew trope. This is a thing that happens a lot because we are in a culture so steeped in centuries-old antisemitism that far too many writers can say, “We’ll make the bad guys hook-nosed aliens who are secretive and love money and secretly run the galaxy from the shadows and have odd dietary restrictions,” and not even notice what they are doing. Even the Lantanites have a (far more benign, but still enough to make you wonder) hint of that – not-quite-humans who walk among us in secret acquiring wealth and power and having a funny accent?
But this is something far more deliberate, and I won’t dare speak to whether this makes it okay, but it’s certainly new and more thoughtful that ways in which Ilyrians are compared to Jewish people particularly in medieval-to-modern Europe aren’t your ugly, scary, “Use the blood of christian babies to make their bread” things, but more, “They’re persecuted and have to move around a lot,” and, “They aren’t allowed to perform their religious ceremonies publicly for fear of persecution,” and, “They are forced by the state to live in ghettos,” and, “The local government imposes pogroms against them,” or, “They are falsely imagined to be inherently dangerous just by virtue of bloodline.” Even more striking, it’s the Federation that’s being cast in the role of the Spanish Inquisition, or worse, certain Very Fine People On Both Sides. This might be subtle enough that no one is angry at NuTrek for being too “woke” by depicting pogroms as bad. Don’t worry, I’m sure the next twist will be obvious enough for them to get angry about.
Perhaps we will get it in a future week, but I’m sad we haven’t gotten to see Pelia and Una interact. Firstly, because Pelia is a joy, and second, because they have this shared experience of having lived most of their lives in the closet (Pelia even used the phrase “came out” last week). Also, I’m hoping Pelia will have charming anecdotes about her past which serve as easter eggs. “Back in the middle ages, I married a human medicine man. He called me a witch. Thought it was just charming misogyny; never had a clue I really was an otherworldly supernatural being,” or “Oh, I first got interested in engineering when I married a mechanic in the 1970s,” or “I took a job once dressing up as a fairy and roughing up millionaires.”
The whole Enterprise gang is mostly off-to-the-side this week, especially Pike, who barely has a line for half the episode. He’s got a strong first scene, persuading Neera to help, but after that, he’s very deliberately sidelined. Batel – who is both Pike’s Friend-with-Benefits and Una’s prosecutor (It’s explicit now that her primary assignment is JAG, avoiding the weird Trek stereotype of “Instead of actual lawyers, we just make the regulars do it”) – warns him off trying to testify himself, anticipating Pasalk’s attack. And he doesn’t even comment while he watches the proceedings from the Enterprise conference room. And it looks like he’s not in the bulk of next week’s episode either. This is a weird under-playing of them having access to Anson Mount and his hair. La’an gets the most plot of the cast, as she fears that it was her angry personal logs that outed Una. Neera talks her toward confronting her own internalized bigotry. Though not an augment herself, La’an inherited the modified DNA of her forebears, and a lifetime of ostracism because of that has instilled the fear that she might have inherited the tendency toward megalomania. But genetics aren’t destiny – a legitimate different angle for the episode to have taken might have been to point out the way La’an undermines the flimsy justification for the genetics laws. Obviously, it doesn’t make sense that she would be restricted by them: she’s not an augment. And yet, she, through entirely natural means, inherited the DNA that supposedly made her ancestors a risk. If the laws are really about protecting lives, La’an logically must be just as dangerous as Khan. If she is not inherently dangerous, then neither can we dismiss all augments as inherently dangerous. If she is exempt only because, not having been augmented herself, she had no choice in the matter and the Federation correctly does not punish the child for the crimes of the parent, then how can they punish Una, whose modifications were done before she was old enough to consent? Indeed, as far as I know, none of the augments we’ve ever met actually consented to their augmentations. Most of them were augmented before they were born, some before they were conceived. (Bashir and the other DS9 augments were augmented as children, but again, without their consent). The law is just plain racist.
So Neera does indeed do some Picardish things, calling out the inhumanity of Starfleet laws, the bigotry they codify. But the amazing turn here is that she doesn’t ask them to look in their hearts and be their better selves and set aside the law as unjust.
She just out-lawyers them. Or rather, she knows it would be too big an ask to get them to overturn the augment ban. But she also knows that the do get that Una’s good people and this law is hurting good people so she gives them a way out. And she carefully lined up all the pieces into place without it being obvious to the audience what she was really doing. Una’s childhood persecution – including the story of a life-threatening injury she could not have treated because of her biology – related on the stand was dismissed by Pasalk as an emotional appeal. I sure thought that was the point. But no: Una’s testimony established that she faced persecution for her biology and religious beliefs, and that she joined Starfleet to escape that persecution.
While Pasalk and Batel questioned the Enterprise crew to establish what they knew and when they knew it, Neera’s questions seemed to be establishing Una’s character. But they weren’t. They were establishing Starfleet‘s character. With La’an, she focuses on how Una was involved in La’an’s rescue and recovery after the death of her family. Even with April, while Neera clearly relished making him look bad, the thrust of her questioning was to establish something specific: that Starfleet captains have wide discretion in how they interpret the law for the purpose of saving lives.
And there we go. She saves Una and gets Pike off the hook too, and this is the comparatively timely social issue that I assume is going to have twitter angry about Woke Trek. Because we are living through years of posturing that sought to invalidate the experiences of immigrants trying to escape persecution in their home countries, conflates any failure to perfectly complete deliberately byzantine legal procedure as “lying”, and seeks to cut off the legal asylum process through trickery and deception. The legal requirements for asylum in the Federation appear to be pretty similar to the ones in the US: you have to (1) meet the definition of being a refugee (ie., be fleeing the threat of harm or persecution in one’s home or place of habitual residence for a protected reason such as religion or ethnicity), (2) Already physically be present in the place where asylum is sought, and (3) ask for it. If you’ve watched The West Wing, you know that’s basically the whole thing: the paperwork, the procedural stuff, that goes into whether or not asylum will be confirmed, but if you’re there, you’re persecuted, and you ask, that starts the process and changes which rules apply. Boom.
While we all thought she was doing the Big Picard Speech thing, Neera was actually laying out the technical argument for asylum. Una’s testimony establishes her as a refugee. Joining Starfleet makes her physically present. And coming out to Pike, and subsequently turning herself in to Starfleet is the request. As established in her questioning of April, it was within Pike’s discretion as captain to grant asylum provisionally – it was, in fact, his duty to not turn her in until the process of making the final determination was completed; you are not, despite what certain government officials would like, supposed to arrest someone who’s asked for asylum. Thus, Starfleet has a choice: they can affirm Una’s status as a refugee and grant asylum, or they can reject her asylum request. I don’t think at this point they can even, legally, convict her of sedition; even a denial doesn’t make it sedition for her to have requested. They could, at best, give her the same deal they’d offered for a guilty plea, and discharge her for the paperwork thing.
I love this. I love that the emotional appeal didn’t end up being the point. I love that it really was the law that saved her. They call it a “technicality”, but that’s not the usual sense of the term; it’s not a matter of some piece of paperwork being incorrect or some loophole being inadequately covered. What they’re really getting at here is that it was a narrow ruling – a ruling that is based on the specific details of Una’s case, and therefore does not establish precedent going forward; they didn’t overturn the augment ban, they just decided that Una’s particular case fell outside of its auspices. That’s why Starfleet v. Bashir and Starfleet v. L’Rel are still a century and change away. But it’s something. It’s moving the needle a little. The next time someone wants to challenge the augment ban, they won’t be able to say that Starfleet v. Chin-Riley establishes a right for augments to serve, but they will be able to say that the service record of Commander Una Chin-Riley disputes the claim that augments are dangerous.
“whereas firing someone because in college, they signed up for the campus socialist club because there was a cute boy at the membership table might get you on the wrong end of a wrongful dismissal suit.”
personally experience?