2 of 2

Write now Article Tools

The present discussion by Congress on the firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys brings into question the motive for the focus. Congress has the right and duty to investigate anything that it feels may involve violations of individual rights such as the U.S. attorneys presently in question. However, this right must be applied equally. The current discussion involves eight (8) U.S. attorneys. However, in 1993 when President Clinton fired all of the 93 U.S. attorneys there was not as much focus on those firings.

The U.S. attorneys have the right to have proper due process when it comes to their termination. If the present situation does not allow this to evolve, then it should be changed. It has been stated that the President has the right to fire U.S. attorneys. However, this right should come with the requirement that there be a basis for the dismissal. If a U.S. attorney is not performing his duties and responsibilities adequately then the process should be in place to remove any attorney that does not perform the assigned duties responsibly. There has been mention that several of the U.S. attorneys have a favorable conviction record. This is great. However, if the convictions were accomplished through unethical methods, then the results do not automatically justify the means. This is not meant to imply that any U.S. attorneys have injected methods that are either unethical or questionable in obtaining the convictions. This statement means that no unethical or questionable efforts should be employed to achieve a conviction.
Attorneys working for the government and other government officials should display the characteristics of integrity such as honesty and not result to methods that would be considered questionable. U.S. attorneys have three distinct requirements. One is to prosecute criminal cases brought by the U.S. government. Another is prosecution and defense of civil cases in which the United States is a party and last the collection of debts owed the U.S. governments which are administratively uncollectible. There are other responsibilities that were added as a result of the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. attorneys have some discretion in prioritizing their workload. It is the duty of those above them in the chain of command to identify what cases should be given priority in using the resources available. One of the conditions that could be involved in any firing of U.S. attorneys is the disregard for the focus of those cases deemed to have priority.
We as individual workers are typically given priorities through our supervisors. We have the responsibility to perform those actions to the best of our abilities. If any of those priorities would be considered unethical or illegal, then we as employees should respectfully decline those requests. While we may not always agree with the priorities that we are given we should dedicate our efforts to accomplish them. If we are to have integrity in our personal and/or work lives we must dedicate our efforts to instilling integrity in the process of performing our job responsibilities.
While this is a subject that is in process, this article is only meant to identify the need for integrity in the investigation of the firings. As I stated above, Congress has the right and duty to investigate any actions that it feels needs review. That review should not have an underlying objective to make any investigation a political event. Congress also has the right to have their questions answered honestly with all the parties involved, barring national security information or executive privilege.

Learn more about this author, Dennis Aubuchon.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Commentary: Firing of US Attorneys under the Bush Administration?
We want to hear your view. Write now!