Tuesday, March 31, 2026

 

That's what I said!

 


I talk to the press fairly often, usually about criminal law and clemency (which are pretty depressing things to talk about lately). It is sometimes disheartening to see how things turn out in print or on the news-- a lot of times, it seems like they didn't exactly pick the best thing I remember saying!

But in this piece in the New York Times last week, Matthew Purdy and Luke Broadwater really did get the best part (I actually was interviewed by a third writer, Kenneth Vogel), which I really appreciate. The article focused on the way in which the Trump administration has taken a hard line on prosecuting fraud in Minnesota, but at the same time has granted clemency to major fraudsters from places like Florida. Here is how it ended:

Mark Osler, a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in Minneapolis who studies clemency, said while “the fraud is real” in Minnesota, he questioned the prosecutorial zeal in rooting it out, given recent events.

In January, the federal prosecutor overseeing the sprawling fraud investigation in Minneapolis resigned along with other prosecutors after Justice Department officials displayed reluctance to investigate the killing of Renee Good by an immigration agent, but pressed for an inquiry into her widow.

Overall, he said, there is “certainly a deep contradiction” in the administration’s approach to fighting fraud.

“The message they want to send about fraud is that blue states have been suckers about fraud and the other message is that the government has been too tough on people who commit fraud in other contexts,” Mr. Osler said.

He said that historically, “presidents favor for clemency people they feel sympathy for.” Given Mr. Trump’s personal experience with civil fraud allegations, “it shouldn’t surprise us that he has the most empathy for the people who have faced the charges he faced.”




Comments: Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

#