Justice Department Reform

If the majority is allowed unrestricted rule, the slide toward dictatorship is inevitable.  When the Senate and the justice department become pawns owing full allegiance to the President, our current system of checks and balances do little to restrict Presidential power.  And once the precedent has been set, it remains in place and is not reversed by future Presidents.  When the justice department is coerced into never investigating wrongdoing by the President, he is effectively above the law.  There is no law that prevents the United States Attorney General from pledging loyalty to the President. 

Careful study of our Constitution shows that supervision of the executive branch of our government can only be done by the States by use of Article V.  

Oversight of the President cannot properly occur if the Attorney General has control over investigations of Presidential wrongdoing.  Ultimate authority must be shifted to the States.  Our best opportunity to investigate wrongdoing by the President or his inner circle still remains with our federal justice system but the party making the decision on who is investigated and the extent of the investigation must shift away from the Attorney General. 

Both the Ken Starr investigation and the Robert Mueller investigation were seriously tainted by partisan influence.  Even the appointment of these special investigators was politically influenced.  So long as the majority party is in charge of the investigative process, true justice may be nebulous. 

The most important question is who can serve as a trusted semi-independent prosecutor.  In a federalist system, the States have a shared governing responsibility.  In the case of oversight of the executive branch of government, the best state level prosecutors may be considered.  Partisanship among the States is similar to partisanship in Congress but the difference is that state level prosecutors have not pledged loyalty to the President. 

Selection of a semi-independent prosecutor must be left to the States.  Certainly, the pool of potential prosecutors begins with the 50 attorneys general.  One political faction usually has a majority so in order to achieve a semi-independent result; a supermajority of states may be needed to weed out the most biased candidates. 

Selection of a semi-independent prosecutor would be a substantial process.  Therefore use of this special prosecutor must not be taken lightly.  Logically, it would be initiated by members of the federal government and not by potentially biased State factions.  Yet we cannot wait for a majority of Congress to initiate action because that majority may have loyalty to the President.  Therefore we must consider the initial premise, if the majority is allowed unrestricted rule, the slide toward dictatorship is inevitable. 

The States will decide if the need is sufficient to appoint a prosecutor.  And elected officials in the States will live with the fallout of the decision to appoint or not appoint the special prosecutor.  Ultimately, the decision on taking action will be up to the prosecutor.  Evidence supplied to the prosecutor by members of our government (suggesting member of Congress) will be weighed. (Consider that if only 2 Senators seek a special State prosecutor, that may not be enough, allowing radicals too much power, and if the bar is set too high and 40 Senators are required, that may diminish the opportunity for justice.  10 Senators, representing at least 5 states, or 10% of a legislative body is substantial.) 

This process may be cumbersome, but it does not place a substantial financial burden on the federal budget.  And once the process is in place, the propensity of members of the executive branch of government to break the law will be diminished. 

Massive reports are made at the request of politicians for consumption by politicians.  The State’s prosecutor acts on the basis of laws that may be violated.  Results will be conclusions as to whether specific laws have been violated.  Opinions as to whether a President should be impeached will be beyond the scope of work of the prosecutor. 

The special prosecutor will seek to convict all parties found guilty.  All of the powers of the United States Attorney General will be vested in the special prosecutor during this process. Sentencing will be carried out for all except the President.  In the case of the President, sentencing recommendations, with the assumption that the President is not in office, will be given to Congress. 

Published by yooper1951

Recently retired real estate appraiser. My interest in Constitutional amendments resulted from the lack of recent Congressional action. It has been too long. Its hard to look at today's political climate and not see a need for a change.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: