Handling of Mueller Report Isn't Mystery It's Been Made Out to Be
Every prosecutor must exercise such discretionary judgment of when and whom to prosecute on the evidence, not on political or media-generated bellowing.
March 26, 2019 at 11:01 AM
3 minute read
The process and outcome of the Mueller report are not the interpretative mystery that swirling commentaries and reactions are projecting. The special counsel 's report and the attorney general's letter are really quite simple to understand. Each respectively executed their defined roles of statutory and delegated authority.
In Mr. Mueller's instance, he did so with remarkable humility, respecting institutional boundaries concerning the obstruction issue, while resolutely dispatching the collusion issue. As to the attorney general, he discharged his exclusive responsibility by doing what is done every day by every prosecutor, local and national. He evaluated the report and record Mr. Mueller presented to him, and with the deputy attorney general's review and concurrence, acted within his prescribed range of authority by declining pursuit of the criminal obstruction issue. Every prosecutor must exercise such discretionary judgment of when and whom to prosecute on the evidence, not on political or media-generated bellowing. The joint actions effectively and jurisdictionally conclude both those issues within their overarching purview and mandates.
Robert Mueller has been universally reputed from the run-up of his appointment to the completion of his duties as the consummate professional. He performed as such with disciplined schooling and belief in the renowned gold-standard prosecutorial principles of conduct, as prescribed almost eighty years ago by then-U S Attorney General, The Honorable Robert Jackson. On April 1, 1940. Jackson (of later fame a SCOTUS Justice and Nuremberg chief prosecutor) addressed the prosecutors of the nation under his charge in a magnificent call to duty – an instructional manual entitled The Federal Prosecutor. The concluding paragraph stated: “A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of power, and the citizen's safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.”
Prosecutors are forbidden to seek their own limelight in pursuit of ideological or political agendas.
The heat-shield against that kind of self-aggrandizing misconduct is measured professionalism. That is the standard under which Mr. Mueller satisfied his duty.
Examine the proceeding from beginning to end:
Robert Mueller held no press conferences and generated no leaks over a 2-year period including the grand finale release of the report this past weekend – a professional and humble hand-up within the lawful institutional chain of command. Despite the knee-jerk demands that the public wants and needs to see the report and underlying record immediately, irrespective of lawful constraints and the true pulse of the nation as to what is needed or desired, there was no leak to a favored media “source” or “spinner” of the outcome.
Mr. Mueller, thus, comes off as an old-fashioned Robert Jackson prosecutor – operating with by-the-book cool professionalism, rather than someone seeking the heat of a political actor or media power-hungry policy muckraker.
So, what has transpired is simple to understand, measured against the gold standard of Robert Jackson's plain-spoken call to duty. So, does all this ruckus with second-guessing amount to anything serious or merit continued handwringing concerning the discharge of their duties?
Joseph W. Bellacosa was an associate justice on the Court of Appeals.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Time for Action: Attorneys Must Answer MLK's Call to Defend Bar Associations and Stand for DEI Initiatives in 2025
5 minute readThe Public Is Best Served by an Ethics Commission That Is Not Dominated by the People It Oversees
4 minute readThe Crisis of Incarcerated Transgender People: A Call to Action for the Judiciary, Prosecutors, and Defense Counsel
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Troutman Pepper, Claiming Ex-Associate's Firing Was Performance Related, Seeks Summary Judgment in Discrimination Suit
- 2Law Firm Fails to Get Punitive Damages From Ex-Client
- 3Over 700 Residents Near 2023 Derailment Sue Norfolk for More Damages
- 4Decision of the Day: Judge Sanctions Attorney for 'Frivolously' Claiming All Nine Personal Injury Categories in Motor Vehicle Case
- 5Second Judge Blocks Trump Federal Funding Freeze
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250