Criminal Justice
The American Prosecutor: Power, Discretion and Accountability
On October 26, 2007 the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS) and the Washington College of Law at American University held an exciting one-day conference on prosecutorial power. Chaired by Professor Angela J. Davis, the conference was entitled "The American Prosecutor: Power, Discretion and Accountability".
A discussion on the power of the prosecutor is both timely and necessary. Recent events in national news, including the proper role of U.S. Attorneys and the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in the Duke alleged rape case, demonstrate the need to explore this important subject.
Reinventing the President's Pardon Power
Margaret Colgate Love
In Reinventing the President’s Pardon Power, Margaret Colgate Love, former United States Pardon Attorney, explores the pardon power, placing it in historical context and explaining why the power was included in the Constitution and granted exclusively to the president. Love then describes how the pardon power was used and administered until the 1980s to serve the overall goals of the republic, effectuate justice and grant mercy. She turns next to what she terms “the decline and fall of ordinary pardoning,” a period in the most recent few decades during which presidential pardoning went into a decline in terms of both the frequency and purposes of its use. The author advocates a return to the regular use of the pardon power as it may be used effectively by presidents to do justice, to communicate a vision of criminal justice, to advance law reform and to avoid infamy for making rare grants that the public perceives as favoritism. Noting that public confidence in pardons has been justifiably diminished, Love urges that “[O]ur next president ought to identify the values pardon serves, define a clear role for it in the criminal justice system, and establish a system for administering the power that will maximize its potential for correcting injustice and encouraging reform.”
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Presidential Pardons Issue Brief - October 2007.pdf | 311.53 KB |
Plea Bargains and the Role of Judges -- 2008 National Convention Breakout Session
Although the Supreme Court's rulings on sentencing issues receive far more media attention, most criminal cases in the U.S. today are resolved through plea bargains, a process over which prosecutors have enormous power and discretion. Should some of the power and discretion currently vested in prosecutors be turned over to judges? What discovery should judges require before approving a plea bargain in a case? How will recent changes in sentencing law affect plea bargaining dynamics? More generally, what role should judges play in the plea bargain process to ensure that justice is being served?
Panelists Included:
-
Play:
-
Windows Media Video -
MP3 Audio
(In)effective Assistance of Counsel for Criminal Defendants -- 2008 National Convention Breakout Session
Supreme Court decisions have made it significantly more difficult for those convicted of crimes to prevail on ineffective assistance of counsel claims, even though many believe that the possibility of appellate review of these claims is one of the principal factors motivating states to supply a basic level funding for counsel for indigent defendants. The stakes are always high, but they are especially high in death penalty cases. How should effective assistance of counsel be measured? What is the national commitment to the right to counsel, and how should it be measured in financial terms? How does this situation play out in the states?
Panelists included:
-
Play:
-
Windows Media Video
A New Era of DNA Collections: At What Cost to Civil Liberties?
Tania Simoncelli and Sheldon Krimsky
ACS is pleased to distribute an issue brief by Tania Simoncelli, Science Advisor in the Technology and Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union, and Sheldon Krimsky, Professor of Urban & Environmental Policy & Planning, School of Arts and Sciences at Tufts University, entitled “A New Era of DNA Collections: At What Cost to Civil Liberties?” In this issue brief, Simoncelli and Krimsky describe the increasing use by law enforcement of DNA databanks and express concern about the civil liberties ramifications of this expansion. DNA is not like fingerprints, they argue, noting that a person’s tissue must be mined to reveal individualized information about a person well beyond that necessary for identification. DNA databanks are growing, they are being searched for characteristics such as race and familial connections, among other things, and law enforcement officials are seeking new ways to obtain the DNA of individuals. The authors assert that uses of DNA in the law enforcement context are being driven by developments in technology, rather than as a result of an informed public policy debate. They question whether the law enforcement uses of DNA databanks of the presumed innocent or the actually innocent are justified given the enormous privacy and civil liberties concerns raised. Finally, Simoncelli and Krimsky provide a brief set of recommendations to contribute to achieving an appropriate balance between law enforcement and civil liberties.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Word - Simoncelli & Krimsky - DNA Collection & Civil Liberties - September 2007.pdf | 307.91 KB |
