Though extensive due process protections apply to the investigation of crimes, and to criminal trials, perhaps the most important part of the criminal process -- the decision whether to charge a defendant, and with what -- is almost entirely discretionary. Given the plethora of criminal laws and regulations in today's society, this due process gap allows prosecutors to charge almost anyone they take a deep interest in. This Essay discusses the problem in the context of recent prosecutorial controversies involving the cases of Aaron Swartz and David Gregory, and offers some suggested remedies, along with a call for further discussion.
"Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything is a Crime"
Related Entries:
- Committing bribery without knowing it
- New Report: The world's policeman in FCPA enforcement
- Aaron Swartz and overcriminalization
- Why does FDA keep drugmakers from informing doctors?
- Overcriminalization and CEO pay
- More on Caronia
- The Transatlantic War Against Homework
- Abuse of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Overcriminalization sale on Amazon
- Overcriminalization videos
- Partners in Crime: Overcriminalization and Overfederalization
- Gibson Guitars settles
- Single Oxycontin pill = ruined life
- Is This What We Shipped For? US Government's Pursuit of Marine Biologist Nancy Black Continues
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




Leave a comment
Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.
The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.