Terrorism, Federalism, and Police Misconduct

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy Pub Date : 2001-12-19 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.294253
William J. Stuntz
{"title":"Terrorism, Federalism, and Police Misconduct","authors":"William J. Stuntz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.294253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Criminal law enforcement in the United States is overwhelmingly local - the large majority of police and prosecutors work for local governments, the large majority of arrests are made by local police, the overwhelming majority of criminal prosecutions are brought by local district attorneys' offices, and the great bulk of prisoners are in their cells as a result of those local prosecutions. The states do very little policing and almost no prosecution. And while the federal government does more in this sphere, it is still very much a backstop. This essay explores two questions: How does that allocation of law enforcement power affect the level of police misconduct in the United States? And how will the war on terrorism change both the allocation and the amount of police misbehavior? In brief, my answers to those questions are: In a system like ours, federal police - chiefly the FBI - may present more serious misconduct problems than do local police, because the FBI is neither politically accountable nor tightly constrained by limited resources. (Local police are both accountable and resource-constrained.) The war on terrorism may change that conclusion, by increasing not only the FBI's power, but also its level of accountability and constraint.","PeriodicalId":46083,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":"665"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2001-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.294253","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Criminal law enforcement in the United States is overwhelmingly local - the large majority of police and prosecutors work for local governments, the large majority of arrests are made by local police, the overwhelming majority of criminal prosecutions are brought by local district attorneys' offices, and the great bulk of prisoners are in their cells as a result of those local prosecutions. The states do very little policing and almost no prosecution. And while the federal government does more in this sphere, it is still very much a backstop. This essay explores two questions: How does that allocation of law enforcement power affect the level of police misconduct in the United States? And how will the war on terrorism change both the allocation and the amount of police misbehavior? In brief, my answers to those questions are: In a system like ours, federal police - chiefly the FBI - may present more serious misconduct problems than do local police, because the FBI is neither politically accountable nor tightly constrained by limited resources. (Local police are both accountable and resource-constrained.) The war on terrorism may change that conclusion, by increasing not only the FBI's power, but also its level of accountability and constraint.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
恐怖主义、联邦制和警察不当行为
美国的刑事执法绝大多数是地方性的——绝大多数警察和检察官为地方政府工作,绝大多数逮捕是由地方警察执行的,绝大多数刑事起诉是由地方检察官办公室提出的,绝大多数囚犯是由于这些地方起诉而被关进牢房的。各州几乎不做警务工作,也几乎不起诉。虽然联邦政府在这方面做得更多,但它在很大程度上仍然是一个后盾。本文探讨了两个问题:执法权力的分配如何影响美国警察不当行为的程度?反恐战争将如何改变警察不当行为的分配和数量?简而言之,我对这些问题的回答是:在像我们这样的系统中,联邦警察——主要是联邦调查局——可能会比地方警察出现更严重的不当行为问题,因为联邦调查局既不负有政治责任,也不受有限资源的严格约束。(当地警察既要负责,又要资源有限。)反恐战争可能会改变这一结论,因为它不仅增强了FBI的权力,还增强了它的问责和约束程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is published three times annually by the Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc., an organization of Harvard Law School students. The Journal is one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship. The late Stephen Eberhard and former Senator and Secretary of Energy E. Spencer Abraham founded the journal twenty-eight years ago and many journal alumni have risen to prominent legal positions in the government and at the nation’s top law firms.
期刊最新文献
The Presumption of Constitutionality Immigration, Freedom, and the Constitution Business Transactions and President Trump's 'Emoluments' Problem Free Expression on Campus: Mitigating the Costs of Contentious Speakers Revitalizing the Clemency Process
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1