The Informant

05/16/20 • 52 min

This week we go inside investigative operations in NYPD internal affairs and in the war and drugs to look at the police use of discretion to selectively break laws in order to pursue the bad guys. One former FBI special agent turned political philosopher argues that local and federal law enforcement are the biggest threat to the rule of law in their ongoing use of discretion to secure informant deals, perform sting operations, and otherwise break laws in order to enforce them. Guest voices include Robert Bryan, Luke Hunt, Nick Taiber, and Sarah Lustbader.

In Slate Plus bonus episode: Sarah Lustbader talks about the incentive public defenders have to make informant deals, and whether we can justify liking police discretionary actions to break laws in the interest of busting crooked cops and politicians, but despise their use for low-level drug offenses. They conclude with talk about what makes for valid and free contracts between unequal parties, and whether there is a difference between and offer and a threat. To get the bonus episode, sign up at www.slate.com/hiphiplus/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Previous Episode

Police Discretion

Is a mobile home a home or a car? Is a car parked inside a home part of the home? The answer to these stoner philosophical questions determine the scope of police power. Over the last 100 years, the Supreme Court has presided over the expansion of police discretionary powers to stop, search, and arrest people through litigation over automobiles. This week, we look at the stories of those decisions, including Carroll, Ross, and Whren, We then turn to the political morality of police discretion, and why John Rawl's test of public reason places far more constraints on law enforcement than the Supreme Court ever would. We investigate the consequence of public reasons tests for targeted policing, racial profiling, and consider whether police should have the power to overrule democratically elected criminal laws. Guest voices include Sarah Seo, Brandon Del Pozo, and archival audio from SCOTUS.

In Slate Plus, Sarah Lustbader and Barry talk about how to implement public reasons test for policing, and how the existing system has judges and prosecutors presume that arrest is the default rightful response to lawbreaking, rather than being a default wrongful response for malum prohibitum crimes. To get the full bonus episode, sign up for Slate Plus at slate.com/hiphiplus/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Next Episode

Gender Justice

On this episode, we look at feminist and progressive prosecution; how does a prosecutor balance the aims of prosecuting more gender-based crimes while also being sensitive to the problems of mass incarceration? We look at the story of one Maine prosecutor who is winning victories in sexual assault cases that were once deemed unwinnable, and whether this lowers the bar of burden of proof to unjust levels for gender crimes. Finally, we look at how one study in 1984 started a 40-year trend in mandatory arrest policies for domestic violence, and how these policies have backfired for the communities those policies were meant to protect. Guest voices include Natasha Irving, Michelle Madden Dempsey, Aya Gruber, and Lawrence Sherman.

In Slate Plus, Sarah Lustbader and Barry talk about whether the adversarial system of prosecution and defense makes the criminal justice system a bad way to pursue improvements in gender relations and reduce gender-based crime. Get the Slate Plus bonus episode by signing up at www.slate.com/hiphiplus

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices