Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. The podcast’s first series is created and produced by students in High Point University’s Honors Program. They will look at a variety of issues raised by ongoing events.

The thirteenth episode of the first series pays tribute to the legacy of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away on September 18th, 2020. This episode examines the controversy over RBG's open seat on the Supreme Court and Amy Coney Barrett's potential appointment. The hosts compare the jurisprudence of both women in regards to prosecutorial power and discuss whether Coney Barrett will rule in favor of limiting the malleability of laws for prosecutors. Additionally, this episode explores how current methods of prosecutorial accountability fail and whether the SCOTUS could become an effective check on prosecutorial discretion.

The resources used for reference in this episode include:

 https://www.bu.edu/sph/2018/07/12/supreme-court-justices-do-make-the-law/

 https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics/rbg-supreme-court-decisions-dissents/index.html

 https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/09/19/what-you-need-to-know-about-amy-coney-barrett-trumps-leading-supreme-court-pick/#1daab9c32161

 https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=365722&p=2471070

 https://home.heinonline.org/blog/2020/09/i-dissent-the-life-and-legacy-of-the-incomparable-ruth-bader-ginsburg/

 https://heinonline.org/HOL/AuthorProfile?collection=journals&search_name=Ginsburg,%20Ruth%20Bader&base=js

 https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/utol26&div=9&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals

 https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/71379/OSLJ_V70N4_0867.pdf

 https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/justices/ginsburg.dec.html

 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057%2F9780230102354_7

 https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/09/how-supreme-court-vacancies-confirmed/#close

 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/20/us/politics/supreme-court-barrett.html

 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-every-republican-senator-has-said-about-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-an-election-year

 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/09/20/ruth-bader-ginsburg-conservatism-418821

 https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/09/profile-of-a-potential-nominee-amy-coney-barrett/

 https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/09/23/rbg-s-mixed-record-on-race-and-criminal-justice

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Cunningham performed the editing this week.

If you have any comments, questions, concerns, or criticisms, please contact us via:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

More episodes of this podcast can be found on iTunes and Spotify.

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. The podcast’s first series is created and produced by students in High Point University’s Honors Program. They will look at a variety of issues raised by ongoing events.

This twelfth episode discusses how the global pandemic has affect the criminal courts. There is little precedent for what COVID-19 has done to courts, laws, and prosecution. Various aspects of the typical court process had to be amended to comply with health precautions and public safety needs. These restrictions must be considered in the context of people’s Constitutional rights. Changes made to balance these competing demands include prison capacities, new practices for prosecutors in staying safe from COVID, keeping front-line officers like police safe from exposure, and de-prioritizing arrests that are less dangerous.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2020/07/16/some-courts-slow-reopening-plans-covid-cases-rise

https://ndaa.org/wp-content/uploads/COVID19_ProtectiveMeasures_Pros ecutorsCourts.pdf

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article244393022.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/opinion/covid-domestic-violence.html?auth=login-email&lo gin=email

https://ndaa.org/covid-19/

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/opinion/covid-domestic-violence.html?auth=login-email&login=email

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. The podcast’s first series is created and produced by students in High Point University’s Honors Program. They will look at a variety of issues raised by ongoing events.

This eleventh episode considers the national debate about the death penalty. It examines the death penalty from the perspective of national uniformity. As it currently stands a person who commits murder in one state may receive the death penalty but a person who commits the same murder in a different state may not. The results from individual states having the discretion to determine for themselves whether to permit the death penalty or not. The episode considers whether this should remain or whether the federal government or Supreme Court should intervene to create a more uniform system.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

https://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/execution/origins-of-capital-punishment/

https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/methods-of-execution

https://deathpenalty.procon.org/forms-of-execution-in-the-united-states/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/for_1.shtml#h1

https://files.deathpenaltyinfo.org/legacy/podcast/resources/Episode14LegalProcess.pdf

https://www.aclu.org/blog/capital-punishment/truth-about-choosing-between-life-and-death

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiy07KTt_DrAhUjZN8KHWR6DmAQFjACegQIDBAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thebalance.com%2Fcomparing-the-costs-of-death-penalty-vs-life-in-prison-4689874&usg=AOvVaw1RMpwFFtPlt0EXrCg4pu18

https://scholarlycommons.susqu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=supr

https://scholarlycommons.susqu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=supr

https://scholarlycommons.susqu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=supr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States

https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/texas-death-penalty

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt8-2-2-1/ALDE_00000967/

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt8_2_2_2_3_1/

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state

https://www.britannica.com/topic/legislation-politics/Uniform-laws

https://www.uniformlaws.org/aboutulc/overview

https://www.uniformlaws.org/acts/overview/uniformacts

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uniform

https://www.uniformlaws.org/acts/ucc

https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/human_rights_vol29_2002/spring2002/hr_spring02_vitiello/

https://www.courts.ca.gov/20142.htm

https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/process/sentencing/three-strikes-law/#1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law#:~:text=Twenty-eight%20states%20have%20some%20form%20of%20a%20%22three-strikes%22,unique%20term%20%22%20prior%20and%20persistent%20offender%20%22.

https://www.aclu.org/other/10-reasons-oppose-3-strikes-youre-out

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! Welcome to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast. This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. Our first series of eight episodes is produced by students in High Point University’s Honors Program. They will look at a variety of issues raised by ongoing events.

This tenth episode features a breakdown of the EPA through different presidential administrations and how its investigating and prosecuting environmental crimes is effected by the different administrations. They specifically look at the Obama Administration’s Clean Water Rule and the Trump Administrations repeal of it and the reevaluation of the Waters of the United States. They then look at a current case being prosecuted and speculate how they think this would be prosecuted in the Obama Administration vs the Trump Administration. They also talk about how the upcoming election this November could have an effect on the EPA’s prosecutorial power and discretion.

The sources used for reference in this episode are: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/02/15-ways-trump-administration-impacted-environment/

https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/basic-information-enforcement

https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/history-clean-water-act

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2019/03/27/467697/debunking-trump-administrations-new-water-rule/

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sc/pr/columbia-man-indicted-federal-charge-dumping-hazardous-waste

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/us/obama-epa-clean-water-pollution.html

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/clean-water

https://www.pbs.org/now/science/cleanwater.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20170108114336/https://www.ok.gov/oag/Media/About_the_AG/

https://www.sierraclub.org/lay-of-the-land/2014/03/obama-administration-restores-clean-water-act-protections-streams-and

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/23/798809951/trump-administration-is-rolling-back-obama-era-protections-for-smaller-waterways)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1319

https://www.justice.gov/usao/resources/annual-statistical-reports

https://www.safewater.org/fact-sheets-1/2017/1/23/cleaning-up-after-pollution#:~:text=This%20process%20typically%20takes%20between,to%20go%20on%20for%20decades.

https://www.justice.gov/usao/resources/annual-statistical-reports

https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/our-mission-and-what-we-do

https://www.justice.gov/enrd/about-division

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/06/29/2015-13435/clean-water-rule-definition-of-waters-of-the-united-states

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2005/04-1034

https://www.justice.gov/enrd/jeffrey-bossert-clark

https://cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/criminal_prosecution/index.cfm?action=3&prosecution_summary_id=2416

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1063639213

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/05/594078923/scott-pruitt-out-at-epa

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/27/trump-to-direct-rollback-of-obama-era-water-rule-tuesday/

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! Welcome to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast. This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. Our first series of eight episodes is produced by students in High Point University’s Honors Program. They will look at a variety of issues raised by ongoing events.

This ninth episode looks at the idea of prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutors hold a lot of power with little to no checks on this power. Prosecutors have extreme discretion when determining which cases to take and what charges are appropriate. To examine prosecutorial discretion, we dive into the case involving the shooting of Rayshard Brooks by Atlanta police officer, Garrett Rolfe. Following a timeline of events, we discuss the charges brought against Rolfe by prosecutor Paul Howard. We conclude with a conversation about the potential pressures that are placed on the prosecutor, specifically public opinion and legislative power.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

• https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/15/what-we-know-how-rayshard-brooks-killing-led-protests-atlanta-wendys/3189901001/

• https://www.wabe.org/attorneys-for-former-atlanta-officer-charged-in-rayshard-brooks-slaying-want-prosecutor-removed/

• https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/paul-howard-ousted-after-serving-more-than-2-decades-as-fulton-county-da

• https://advance.lexis.com/container/?pdmfid=1000516&crid=498c7b76-75af-4926-8ba7-5145e8de8fcd&config=00JAAzZDgzNzU2ZC05MDA0LTRmMDItYjkzMS0xOGY3MjE3OWNlODIKAFBvZENhdGFsb2fcIFfJnJ2IC8XZi1AYM4Ne&ecomp=wg7dk&prid=fd4182ad-3dd6-4a09-87fd-4ba65e31c5ed

• https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/07/08/889160799/georgia-congressman-asks-doj-to-investigate-da-handling-rayshard-brooks-case

• https://www.ajc.com/lifestyles/after-day-protests-atlanta-more-people-react-rayshard-brooks-death/twGJvcVGzKSAH0BXEmEOfO/

• https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/atlanta-interim-police-chief-says-da-was-too-quick-bring-charges-rayshard-brooks-shooting/WE2ERNY22RGQTCCGPCRFAXYH7A/

• https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=565.021&bid=29265&hl=

• https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/

• Graham v. Connor, 490US386 (1989).

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. This is our third(!) series. This series looks closely at particular issues and how they relate to the intersection politics of prosecution and is produced by student volunteers and High Point University Criminal Justice professor Scott Ingram.

The first episode in this series examines the opioid crisis in the United States and how prosecutors have addressed it. In the November 2019 elections, many prosecutors ran, in part, on the promise to prosecute people responsible for opioid overdose deaths. Prosecutors can address the problem in two ways. First they can propose legislation. Second, and more likely, they can prosecute those who distribute opioids. The episode focuses on this latter route.

Sources for this episode:

o https://www.georgetownbehavioral.com/blog/origin-and-causes-of-opioid-epidemic

o https://www.optum.com/health-insights/opioid-crisis-myths.html

o https://englishmountain.com/8-myths-about-opioids/

o People v Tseng 30 Cal.App.5th 117 (Cal.App. 2018)

o Thomas v State 186 A.2d 857 (Md. App. 2018)

o https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/26/federal-prosecutors-open-criminal-probe-of-opioid-makers-and-distributors-report-says.html

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use the Mini-Studio and his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Irish performed the editing this week.

Comments, questions, concerns or criticisms? Contact us here:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

Email: [email protected]

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. This is our second series. It highlights current events where the politics of prosecution intersect and is produced by student volunteers and High Point University Criminal Justice professor Scott Ingram.

The fifth episode in this series examines the President’s recent tweets about the Justice Department. Despite the Attorney General requesting that the President stop tweeting about the Department, the President continues to assert he has absolute control over the Justice Department. This assertion raises an important question about how much control the president SHOULD exert over the Justice Department. After introducing the recent events that raised the question, we have a discussion about different aspects of the problem.

Sources for this episode:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/12/roger-stone-sentencing-trump-attacks-doj-prosecutors/4735847002/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/11/president-trump-slams-sentencing-recommendation-roger-stone/4721747002/

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/criminal-division

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/barr-pushes-back-against-trumps-criticism-of-justice-dept-says-tweets-make-it-impossible-for-me-to-do-my-job/2020/02/13/7ff5f308-4e7c-11ea-9b5c-eac5b16dafaa_story.html

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/14/806052193/former-fbi-official-andrew-mccabe-wont-face-charges

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use the Mini-Studio and his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Irish performed the editing this week.

Jeopardy theme music courtesy of: http://www.orangefreesounds.com/jeopardy-theme-song/

Comments, questions, concerns or criticisms? Contact us here:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

Email: [email protected]

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. This is our second series. It highlights current events where the politics of prosecution intersect and is produced by student volunteers and High Point University Criminal Justice professor Scott Ingram.

The fourth episode in this series continues our look at the recently-completed impeachment trial by examining the “unimpeached co-conspirators.” While the President may have been acquitted, could others face criminal prosecution? We look specifically at conspiracy using primary sources collected by the website Just Security. After recounting the timeline, we evaluate whether there is sufficient evidence to prove anyone else agreed to commit a criminal offense and took an overt act in furtherance of that offense.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/957

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/30121

US v Renzi 769 F.3d 731 (9th Cir.)

https://www.justsecurity.org/67076/public-document-clearinghouse-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry/#WhistleblowerComplaint

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use the Mini-Studio and his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Irish performed the editing this week and created the episode’s graphic.

Comments, questions, concerns or criticisms? Contact us here:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

Email: [email protected]

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. This is our second series. It highlights current events where the politics of prosecution intersect and is produced by student volunteers and High Point University Criminal Justice professor Scott Ingram.

The third episode in this series takes a different look at the just-completed impeachment trial of Donald Trump in the United States Senate. Rather than examine the facts, we look at the prosecutors, the House managers. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi selected seven Democrats to prosecute the President. To better understand their political/prosecutorial role, it helps to compare them to the only other modern Presidential impeachment, that of Bill Clinton. In 1998, House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde selected thirteen managers to prosecute Clinton before the Senate. With this comparison we look at selection strategy, function, partisanship and demographics.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/impeachment/clinton-impeachment-and-its-fallout

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/us/politics/clinton-impeachment-trial.html

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/01/what-its-like-to-manage-an-impeachment-trial-in-u-s-senate.html

https://famous-trials.com/Clinton

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/11/04/former-lawmaker-who-helped-conduct-clinton-impeachment-trial-explains-how-it-works/

https://nadler.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=394178

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/01/17/trump-impeachment-what-steps-senate-trial/4495963002/

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/478886-meet-pelosis-7-impeachment-managers

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/18/trump-clinton-impeachment-100691

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/politics/zoe-lofgren-impeachment-manager/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/11/us/politics/zoe-lofgren-democrats-impeachment.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-an-impeachment-manager-what-do-they-do-how-are-they-picked/

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/us/politics/jason-crow.html

https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/16/who-is-jason-crow-impeachment-manager-colorado/

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/01/15/congresswoman-sylvia-garcia-named-prosecution-team-impeachment-trial/

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use the Mini-Studio and his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Irish performed the editing this week.

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]

Welcome back to the Politics of Prosecution Podcast! This podcast examines the interaction between politics, broadly defined, and criminal prosecution on the local, state and federal levels. Our goal is to produce a variety of shows using different media. This is our second series. It highlights current events where the politics of prosecution intersect and is produced by student volunteers and High Point University Criminal Justice professor Scott Ingram.

The second episode in this series explores the arguments presented to the United States Supreme Court in the case of Kelly v. United States. The case questions the limits of property as applied to public corruption prosecutions. The case originated with the closure of several lanes of the George Washington Bridge that caused massive traffic delays. The Port Authority closed the lanes in retaliation for the Fort Lee, New Jersey mayor’s refusal to endorse New Jersey governor Chris Christie for re-election. Following her conviction for her role in the closure, Bridget Kelly appealed claiming that the scheme did not appropriate any property. She lost in each court up to the Supreme Court but may have found some sympathetic ears at the Supreme Court as the Court has taken steps in recent years to limit the scope of the fraud statutes, especially in public corruption cases. This episode explores whether that trend will continue.

The sources used for reference in this episode are:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1059/116047/20190917150049217_18-1059%20ts.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1059/123477/20191122174249018_18-1059bsUnitedStates.pdf

18 USC 666

18 USC 1343

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/483/350/

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/579/15-474/#tab-opinion-3590961

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/08-1394

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/01/argument-analysis-justices-tackle-convictions-arising-from-bridgegate-scandal/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/18/opinions/supreme-court-bridgegate-case-rodgers/index.html

https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/whitehouse-files-supreme-court-brief-in-bridgegate-case

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-1059

A special thank you goes to HPU’s Media Services Librarian Josh Harris for allowing us to use the Mini-Studio and his outstanding recording equipment.

Taylor Irish performed the editing this week.

Please follow us on:

Twitter: @Poli_Pros

Instagram: Poli.n.Pros

You can find this podcast on iTunes and Spotify.

If you have comments, questions, concerns or criticisms, you can email us at [email protected]