Men in black (robes)
A legal affairs reporter says that if you're looking for a "conspiracy" to bring down President Clinton, you might start with the head of the United States Supreme Court.
Topics: Hillary Rodham Clinton, Bill Clinton, Department of Justice, News
It’s blow-back time. Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s spectacular abuses of prosecutorial power and massive ethical breaches have now infected many of his liberal critics with a reckless hysteria of their own.
At issue is the Independent Counsel Act — the 1978 law designed to prevent repeats of “Saturday Night Massacres,” like Richard Nixon’s firing of Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox. Now, with the American public recoiling at Starr’s tactics in the Monica Lewinsky affair, there are calls for the abolition of the whole institution.
“Now I know its creation was a mistake,” declared former-Sen. Paul Simon of Illinois, who voted in favor of the original law. In the Washington Post, University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein called the statute “a catastrophic failure,” while liberal New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis prostrated himself before Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who years ago wrote a lone dissent against the Independent Counsel Law.
But this sudden rush to judgment, and the solution proposed — to abolish the office “as quickly as possible” in Sunstein’s words — betrays a dangerous misunderstanding of the problem, and is doing the public interest no favors.
Some of the hysteria can be laid at Hillary Clinton’s door, specifically her portrayal of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” with Kenneth Starr at the center of the web. But the reality is much narrower. The underpinning of Starr’s investigation-turned-inquisition is located in a narrow, more discrete chain of decision making that, in some ways, is much more disturbing than the first lady’s broad-brush picture.
Under the 1978 law, the chief justice of the Supreme Court names a “Special Division” from the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington — more commonly known as the “three-judge panel” — that in turn selects independent counsels when called upon to do so by the Justice Department.
The system worked pretty well throughout the Reagan and Bush years: The Special Division chose largely non-partisan prosecutors, many from the relatively objective environs of academia and most from the same party as the administrations they were investigating (e.g., Iran-contra counsel Lawrence Walsh). As a result some of the seamier practices, especially of the Reagan years, were exposed — the HUD scandal, Iran-contra, domestic sleaze involving presidential appointees. Altogether, they obtained convictions of 27 Reagan administration officials, with just three (including Oliver North’s) overturned on appeal.
Bruce Shapiro is national correspondent for Salon News. More Bruce Shapiro.




Comments
0 Comments