Yes. In our adversarial justice system, we rely on the DA to eagerly prosecute, the defense attorney or public defender to eagerly defend, the judge or jury to

Yes. In our adversarial justice system, we rely on the DA to eagerly prosecute, the defense attorney or public defender to eagerly defend, the judge or jury to render the verdict, and the legislature to pass laws. Trying to compensate for dysfunction in one system by introducing dysfunction in another only makes the issues worse. Boudin was a public defender, and a pretty good one at that. He carried the public defender mindset into the DA's office, and it didn't work well. (You edited your comment to add "irrespective of circumstances", which changes the meaning. There will always be gray areas where we rely on the judge or the DA to exercise discretion, but in a healthy system the scope of those areas can't amount to refusing to enforce entire statutes or reinterpreting statutes by executive policy.)