At the NYPD, a judge doesn't need to sign off on opening up an investigation into a mosque as a terrorism organization. The oversight is internal.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The NYPD has too urgent a mission and too few officers for us to waste time and resources on broad, unfocused surveillance. We have a responsibility to protect New Yorkers from violent crime or another terrorist attack - and we uphold the law in doing so.
New Yorkers must be able to trust the men and women of the NYPD. They must come forward to report crimes. And they must come forward as witnesses.
I don't think a judge should be too much involved in outside activities.
The vast majority of A.D.A.s put everything on the line to make sure justice is served. That's what I love about prosecutors and the New York police.
Mere access to the courthouse doors does not by itself assure a proper functioning of the adversary process.
Terrorism is not a matter that can be left to law enforcement, with its deliberative process, built-in delays, and safeguards that may let the prisoner go free on procedural grounds.
The NSA is forbidden to 'target' American citizens, green-card holders or companies for surveillance without an individual warrant from a judge.
Look at the Chandra Levy case. It's become a Star Chamber. The major networks, the cable networks, they're being prosecutors. They're judges and jurors and executioners. Well, c'mon, that's ridiculous. But they're doing it.
At the Justice Department, we have no greater obligation than ensuring all people are treated equally under the law, and Americans must know that we will vigorously pursue criminal activity regardless of whether the crime is committed on a street corner or in a corner office.
But one way or another, judges perform a very vital function in our society. They have a risky job and they are entitled to security.
No opposing quotes found.