The Constitutional Right Not to Be Framed

Published November 04, 2009 @ 09:11AM PT

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this morning on the limits of prosecutorial immunity, and in arguing for universal protection from lawsuits, the Iowa prosecutors involved didn't mince words. There is no freestanding constitutional "right not to be framed," they wrote.

The prosecutors in this case aren't alone in this stark -- and saddening -- view. They were joined by the Obama administration, 28 states and several prosecutors' professional organizations.

On one side of the case are two men who served 25 years in Iowa prisons for a murder evidence shows they likely didn't commit. On the other, prosecutors who allegedly fabricated evidence during the investigation of a murder and hid evidence of another suspect's guilt.

The decision on this case, Pottawattamie County v. McGhee, will hinge on whether the court is willing and able to restrict prosecutorial immunity to the trial phase only, allowing defendants in stark cases such as this to sue based on evidence showing that prosecutors engaged in misconduct during the investigation. It'll be interesting to see what happens this morning in oral arguments and where the court comes down in the months ahead.

Here's some media and analysis on the case:

NPR's Morning Edition covered the case in detail this morning, with striking details onthe lengths to which prosecutors went to convict these two men.

Erin Miller offered some good analysis at SCOTUSblog.

The Washington Post opined that the "prospect of being held liable will help to keep ('renegade' prosecutors) in line or, at least, hold them accountable."

SCOTUSwiki has the briefs and filings.

Share this Post

Comments (2)

What? Our Judicial system performs heinous, unethical acts and the organization deciding whether or not individuals involved get prosecuted is - none other than - the Judicial system.

Only one thing to say about that: we're from the government and we are here to help you.

Now that we are in the technological age of the internet, why can't we devise a national, state, county and city system of secure internet voting to put a true democracy into power? We have come to trust the internet with our finances via online banking, credit cards sites, etc. When Congress does something that we don't agree with, we could simply take it to a public vote and be done with it - one way or the other.

Heck, I'm not even sure we'd eventually even NEED Congress. It might be that we could trash them and their cushy, embezzled, self-written, tax-funded without our consent healthcare that we can't participate in.

Posted by Fred Frankenberg on 11/04/2009 @ 10:53AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- 3 people like this comment. Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Fred
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Wow, now this is about real change in America. Unfortunately, the disenfranchised numbers have escalated so that now many ihdividuals can not vote. A felony for having an ounce of marijuana in the 1970's can prevent a person from voting ever. The number of crimes labeled "felony" have blossomed out of control. I like your idea. We need to reverse the trend of making a hangnail a felony.

Posted by Deanna Ross on 11/12/2009 @ 02:58PM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Deanna
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

Comment

Check Spelling

Email me when there are new posts to this thread
Comment Policy

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Matt has worked and volunteered in various capacities in criminal justice reform for several years. When he's not blogging, he works as the Online Communications Manager at the Innocence Project. Views expressed here are Matt's, and don't represent the positions of the Innocence Project.