honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Thursday, August 7, 2003

EDITORIAL
Ashcroft is alienating a responsible judiciary

Medical marijuana, physician-assisted suicide, and now federal judges who are considered too wimpy on crime.

These are among the chief targets on Attorney General John Ashcroft's growing hit list. Frankly, we'd rather the U.S. Justice Department devote more energy to frontline threats, such as terrorism and corporate fraud.

But no. Ashcroft insists on practicing a strange brand of justice. His latest directive is to require U.S. prosecutors to keep close tabs on judges who hand out light sentences, and aggressively appeal them, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal.

That's another strike against judicial discretion, a principle we, for one, value greatly. The move is part of the Feeney amendment, which makes it easier for appeals courts to lengthen sentences set by judges that are shorter than those in federal guidelines.

The measure, adopted by Congress in April, has more than irked judges, including U.S. Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

And no wonder.

What intelligent and responsible judge would relish the prospect of dispensing draconian sentences to petty drug offenders? Why, only this June, New York's U.S. District Judge John S. Martin announced his resignation, citing the erosion of judicial discretion.

One-size-fits-all justice is not a system that generates respect for our court system.

Our judges must know they can dispense justice as they see it without the fear that Washington will be aggressively second-guessing them.

If this continues, the federal bench will be virtually bare. We need judges, not number crunchers.