ACCUSE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER DANA MILBANKWASHINGTON POSTCongressional investigators have not produced evidence to link the harassment of conservative groups to the White House or to higher-ups in the Obama administration. But the lack of evidence that any political appointee was involved hasn’t stopped the lawmakers from assuming that it simply must be true. And so, they are going to hold hearings until they confirm their conclusions.
DNA AND SUSPICIONLESS SEARCHES EDITORIALNEW YORK TIMESUntil now, the Supreme Court has allowed suspicionless searches — also called “special needs” searches by the court — only when there is some justification other than discovering evidence of criminal wrongdoing. For example, the court has approved such searches in the form of random drug tests of railroad employees to ensure safety of the railroads. In this case, there was neither a basis for suspicion nor a special need.
WHY THE COURT WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW CHEEK SWABSAKHIL REED AND NEAL K. KATYALNEW YORK TIMESProper DNA testing can simultaneously exonerate innocent people who have been wrongly accused and find the bad guys — a true win-win situation — and in the process, this amazing new technology can powerfully deter crime. On the other hand, DNA testing without strict safeguards can reveal lots more personal information than a mere fingerprint. … If members of racial minorities are more likely to be wrongly arrested, they and their relatives will loom disproportionately large in the government’s DNA database.
GIVE MANNING A PLEA DEAL IN CLASSIFIED LEAKS CASEEUGENE ROBINSONWASHINGTON POSTOne difference between Ellsberg and Manning, I suppose, is that Ellsberg’s leak was more focused; the secret Pentagon study... amounted to 7,000 pages, as opposed to Manning’s alleged 700,000. ... Any such large, unsifted release of U.S. diplomatic cables is bound to include disclosures that put lives in danger. WikiLeaks and the news organizations that published some of the information tried to make appropriate redactions. Manning allegedly just threw it all out there, heedless of the consequences. That kind of callous disregard, for life as well as the law, deserves punishment. But I believe “heedless” is the right word... Unless the government really believes he was a spy working for the enemy — which I doubt — he shouldn’t be prosecuted as one.
OBAMACARE BAIT AND SWITCH EDITORIALWALL STREET JOURNALThey now concede that individual costs will rise but claim that it is unfair to compare today's market to ObamaCare because ObamaCare mandates much richer benefits. Another liberal rationalization is that the cost-increasing regulations are meant to help people with pre-existing conditions, so they're worth it. So they're finally admitting what some us predicted from the start, but that's also the policy point. Americans are being forced to buy more expensive coverage than what they willingly buy today.
DON’T TRUST THE PENTAGON TO END RAPEKIRBY DICKNEW YORK TIMESThere is a way to stop these predators: we should prosecute and incarcerate them. But here the military fails entirely.Though the Defense Department estimates that there were 26,000 sexual assaults in the military last year, fewer than 1 percent resulted in a court-martial conviction. Why? There is a deep institutional bias in the military’s justice system; senior officers can — and often do — intervene to prevent cases from being investigated and prosecuted