This shortcut goes off track
There is a difference between prosecutorial discretion and prosecutorial abdication. Democratic candidate for Suffolk DA Rachael Rollins seems to have lost track of that distinction. This is a very dangerous course to take for someone who wants to be entrusted with public safety.
Of course, prosecutors have an obligation to look at cases brought to them by law enforcement to decide whether prosecution is in the public interest. They may decline to prosecute because a case cannot be proven, because there are extenuating facts, or for a variety of other reasons. We expect our prosecutors to use professional judgment and ensure that justice, tempered by the right amount of mercy, is done. No one disputes that.
What Rollins has done is entirely different. She has listed 15 crimes that she will generally not prosecute. To her credit, she hedges a teeny little bit, seeming to indicate that in special circumstances, and with her permission, she might go in a different direction. But her general intent is clear. For these crimes, she does not intend to enforce the law.
The list is something of a potpourri. Some of them are trivial. Other than my general concern that a prosecutor should not issue a blanket declaration that she (or he) is overriding the Legislature by decriminalizing conduct through executive order rather than seeking legislation, I could go either way, for example, on disorderly conduct or simple trespass.
The same is not true for crimes such as resisting arrest, drug possession with intent to distribute, receiving stolen property, and the like. These can be very serious matters.
Take resisting arrest. One of the reasons police avoid many potentially dangerous confrontations is that resisting arrest is a crime. As a result, that means that sometimes an innocent person has to let themselves get arrested and go to the station to get matters sorted out. But often the police cannot figure out what happened right after an incident. Giving everyone impunity to resist a legal arrest can, and will, lead to escalation and more situations where force is required.
Similarly, if in some cases her office declines to prosecute someone arrested for possession of drugs with intent to distribute because of the facts of the case, I will be the last to make a fuss. When she effectively declares that Suffolk County is open territory for every drug dealer in the commonwealth, that is both wrong and a usurpation of the role of the Legislature.
Prosecutors are an important part of the justice system, but they are not the only players. If she truly believes that it is fine and dandy for people to drive with a revoked license (often because of a DUI offense) then make the case that the law should be changed. Shortcuts such as this unilateral declaration are wrong both as a matter of process and substance.