Crime is on the rise across the country.
NYC violent crime, homelessness causes massive drop in subway ridership: 'Crime is out of control'https://t.co/7XyH95KsYu— Fox News (@FoxNews) January 27, 2022
When you have political leaders demonize police, refuse to prosecute criminals & release dangerous people from jail early you get the highest murder rate in 25 years pic.twitter.com/PRpUJCHpok— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) January 21, 2022
The surge in carjackings is driven by Democratic soft-on-crime policies like ending cash bail.— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) January 27, 2022
Instead of blaming car companies, we should reverse these deadly policies. https://t.co/KDJA23lGlJ
There's no doubt that Soros-backed, rogue prosecutors have contributed to this. Former Congressman and Wisconsin DA Sean Duffy wrote last week:
When I was a prosecutor 20 years ago, the profession attracted Republicans, Democrats and Independents dedicated to the mission of dispensing the law and willing to take a government salary for the privilege to serve and administer justice. That’s all changing with the help of early Obama campaign investor and billionaire left-wing activist, George Soros, a man determined to "fundamentally transform" America by electing men like Bragg.
Around 2015, Soros devised a plan to destabilize America through our criminal justice system. His plan was as devious as it was smart. Instead of working to "reform" the criminal justice system by changing the laws on the books through legislatures, Soros funded a campaign to just change the district attorneys.
Soros understood how tedious and expensive it is to elect enough like-minded state legislators to change laws. Likewise, ballot initiatives can be difficult to coordinate since those pesky voters can make the outcomes unpredictable.
A liberal, social justice DA has the power to undermine the law by simply not enforcing the law. A DA, through the power of prosecutorial discretion, can reduce charges and sentence recommendations. He or she can enact criminal justice and bail reform without any change in the underlying law.
As Andy McCarthy points out, these progressive prosecutors are betraying the Constitution:
At bottom, progressive prosecutors look at penal statutes as suggestions, not binding law. They resist, for example, enforcing statutory gang-crime enhancements that lawmakers have enacted to address a scourge that ravages urban communities. They mulishly refuse to file such charges because they believe the legislature’s constitutional authority is trumped by the prosecutor’s perception of what social justice demands — based on the loopy “disparate impact” theory, which holds that laws must be racist, and thus illegitimate, if one racial group violates them at a higher rate than other racial groups.
Moreover, progressive prosecutors use their discretionary authority to plea-bargain as a smokescreen to rewrite penal statutes. When I was a Justice Department prosecutor, our guidelines provided that, in order to enforce the laws as Congress enacted them, our duty was to charge the most serious readily provable offense, under the congressional statute that most closely fit the conduct in question. Ergo, if a defendant committed an armed bank robbery, the prosecutor was to charge armed bank robbery; “prosecutorial discretion” did not permit a prosecutor instead to charge, say, misdemeanor theft of $1,000, just because the prosecutor believed the 20-year sentence Congress had prescribed for armed bank robbery was too severe under the circumstances. You could only decline to charge armed bank robbery if you honestly assessed that the proof was insufficient to establish that offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the evidence was strong enough, your job was to enforce Congress’s law; and on conviction, the judge’s job was to impose Congress’s sentence. Case closed.
In stark contrast, progressive prosecutors exploit what they disingenuously call “prosecutorial discretion” to change the controlling law. They do not plea-bargain; they fact-bargain, reimagining the criminal’s conduct until it fits their standards for low-level disposition, no-incarceration treatment, or — often — no prosecution at all.
When prosecutors do this, they are not, as Alvin Bragg feigns, upholding the Constitution. They are betraying the Constitution. When they engage in a pattern of doing it — or, worse, when progressive prosecutors celebrate themselves for doing it — their dereliction of duty is misconduct warranting removal from office.
Join RNLA this Friday at 3:00 p.m. ET for a webinar featuring The Heritage Foundation's Cully Stimson and the Manhattan Institute's Rafael Mangual discussing the negative effects rogue prosecutors are having in communities across the country.
Rogue prosecutors refuse to enforce the law and hold criminals accountable for their actions. Join RNLA for a webinar this Friday at 3 p.m. ET discussing the negative effects these Soros-backed prosecutors are having in communities across the country. https://t.co/Uar3rhmQ1n— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) January 27, 2022