Over the weekend we told you about the reporting on the DOJ request for ’emergency powers’ and the uproar from both Democrats and Republicans. But according to the DOJ, both the Politico an Rolling Stone articles that created the uproar got it wrong:
FOX NEWS – A Justice Department spokesperson issued a clarification overnight regarding a recent “emergency powers” request to Congress involving prolonged pre-trial incarceration during the coronavirus crisis that drew a backlash on social media.
The DOJ claimed that there had been “confusion” after Politico and Rolling Stone wrote that the department was seeking new “emergency powers” for itself that would “suspend” certain rights in criminal matters. In reality, the spokeswoman said, judges would be the ones to determine whether a defendant could be held in custody for longer than normally permitted.
“Bottom line: The proposed legislative text confers powers upon judges. It does not confer new powers upon the executive branch,” said a statement posted by DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec early Monday morning. “These provisions are designed to empower the courts to ensure the fair and effective administration of justice.”
Here’s the full statement by the DOJ that explains the problem and what they are actually trying to get Congress to do…
Here’s the full thread. pic.twitter.com/bOJmizaPsK
— KerriKupecDOJ (@KerriKupecDOJ) March 23, 2020
I’ve enlarged the statement so you could read it:
The statement makes it sound far less ominous, as they point out this was just a recommendation to give judges more authority to ensure that criminals don’t go free because courts are shutting down over the pandemic.