The Federalist Society will be hosting a teleforum next Tuesday at 3 pm EST titled, "Pros and Cons: Our Criminal Justice System at Work." The participants will be Judge Alex Kozinski of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and yours truly.
The topic is introduced as follows:
Our panelists will discuss the criminal justice system generally, and the role of the prosecutor in particular. Some argue that, with the weight of the state and its resources on one side, including a deep book of potential crimes, the deck is unfairly stacked against criminal defendants. Others argue that police and prosecutors act in good faith, and credit them with incapacitating career criminals, trimming recidivism, and causing a plunge in national crime statistics. Who has the better of the argument?
Judge Kozinski has been outspoken on this subject, see, e.g., his preface here to the 44th Edition of Georgetown Law's Annual Review of Criminal Procedure.
There will be an opportunity for call-in questions. A lively time should be had by all.
Good luck, Bill.
Kozinski is at the forefront of the anti-law enforcement/anti-prosecutor narrative that is currently sweeping across America. He cites isolated cases of questionable conduct by a few prosecutors and, through his typical hyperbole, claims it is an "epidemic" threatening the foundation of the criminal justice system. In so doing he calls into question the ethical standards of every prosecutor in the country.
Ironically, if you know anything about his sordid background, Kozinski is last person who should be spouting off about ethics.
Before the debate, you may want to watch some of his recent appearances before CATO and, I believe, the Federalist Society. Kind of like a football team watching film of their upcoming opponent before the big game.
As you know, Kozinski has absolutely no prosecutorial experience (except when he was the subject of a possible criminal prosecution stemming from his porn incident). In fact, he had virtually no judicial experience when, at age 35, he was (mistakenly, IMO) nominated to the 9th Circuit. Yes, he may be intelligent. But IMO his intelligence is superseded by a complete lack of humility and an overblown ego.
Stay calm. Stay focused. And dissect his argument piece-by-piece.
Thanks, Paul. I'm expecting a very bright man with, shall we say, a less than fully realistic view of the on-the-ground realities of crime.