Really excited to see how this develops. My main objection to criminal charges for abusive prosecutors is that bringing criminal charges against someone for doi

Really excited to see how this develops. My main objection to criminal charges for abusive prosecutors is that bringing criminal charges against someone for doing their job has always struck me as being one step away from mob justice. I know I would never take a job where part of what I'm being paid for is running a risk of criminal prosecution. You just never know where the political winds are blowing at any given time. You can hedge against a risk of civil litigation, but not against criminal prosecution, nobody in their right mind should go anywhere near that shit unless they absolutely have to. I personally wouldn't mind rolling the dice on a world where there's no prosecutors because nobody will take the job and therefore no criminal justice system, but perhaps that's not the best solution here. But I do believe solving this would be an important victory for rule of law, giving wrongfully-prosecuted citizens a viable legal path for redress of grievance. Just off the top of my head, I would say that the worst penalty anybody should have for not doing their job properly is to lose that job, and that the system should be set up to properly train them and to absorb the costs of someone screwing up. Any other kind of work environment is abusive. So limiting liability to civil damages paid out by the government in malicious prosecution cases makes sense to me. Much as I want to clap these assholes in irons and make them serve alongside the people they wrongfully convicted, I don't think that's objectively the right move here.