The Justice Department’s decision to charge former presidential candidate John Edwards with campaign finance violations drew criticism from legal experts, including some former prosecutors, that the case was too aggressive.
In the months before the indictment, the Justice Department took flak from government watchdogs for dropping corruption investigations of members of Congress. They argued that the government was not aggressive enough, and gun-shy from the collapse of its case against the late senator Ted Stevens .
Prosecutors at the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, whose mission is to probe corruption in government, “are in a very difficult position,’’ said Peter Zeidenberg, a former Public Integrity prosecutor.
Zeidenberg, who has been critical of the Edwards case but praises the section’s work overall, added that “the public wants them to be fearless and take on tough cases. But if they don’t prosecute, they’re seen as timid and not having any guts.’’
The Edwards case poses the latest challenge for a section that was in crisis two years ago. Prosecutorial wrongdoing led Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to ask a judge to drop the case against Stevens (R-Alaska). Lawyers inside and outside the department spoke of staff turnover and poor supervision. The section’s leadership was replaced.
Since January, Public Integrity prosecutors have won eight trials: those convicted include a former Virginia state delegate, the former majority leader of the Puerto Rican Senate and a former office manager for the late senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) found guilty of stealing more than $75,000 in unauthorized bonuses.
Justice Department officials say morale is high and the section’s leadership has stabilized under Jack Smith, a former federal prosecutor in Brooklyn selected to lead Public Integrity last year. “I could not be more proud of Public Integrity and of what we’ve accomplished,’’ said Lanny A. Breuer, assistant attorney general for the department’s Criminal Division, who supervises Public Integrity. “There is no doubt in my mind that it’s a very dynamic place.’’
But that hasn’t stopped the criticism. Much of it has focused on the department’s decisions to drop without filing charges at least seven investigations of current and former members of Congress since President Obama took office. Sources familiar with the probes have said that several were derailed or slowed by members asserting privileges under the Constitution’s “speech or debate” clause, which shields legislative work from executive branch interference.
After Edwards was charged with using illegal campaign donations to conceal his mistress from voters, experts said the government’s legal theory was unprecedented and overly aggressive. Prosecutors say payments from political donors to support and shield the mistress, Rielle Hunter, constituted illegal campaign contributions.
Justice officials declined to comment on Edwards or other cases, but Breuer said that “every decision we make in a high-profile case will please some and frustrate others. We are not going to make our decisions based on that. We are going to prosecute cases based on the facts and the law.’’
Loading...
Comments