Why should the court impose a judgment in a case in which the SEC alleges a serious securities fraud, but the defendant neither admits nor denies wrongdoing?
I am not opposed to the limited use of polygraphs in a case where a person is suspected of wrongdoing. But widespread use of the polygraph as a screening tool goes far beyond what is acceptable.
It's a bit embarrassing for a company to be exposed for wrongdoing, but it's really embarrassing if it's done by making them the butt of a joke.
We do not need to be heroes to save the world; all we need is humility, a critical view of the commercial and political interests of those who would mislead us into wrongdoing, and a sense of wonder.
The Christian - the biblical - concept of mercy toward wrongdoers only exists in relation to justice. Showing mercy, in relation to wrongdoing, means treating someone better than they deserve.
Opting for conspiracy over facts and partisanship over constitutional principles, Democrats have chosen to ignore the damning evidence of wrongdoing by the Obama-era FBI.
Government lawyers have a duty to disclose evidence of wrongdoing in the government.
People should be allowed to document evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Where is the expectation of privacy if someone is conspiring to commit crime?
Some emotions are essential to law and to public principles of justice: anger at wrongdoing, fear for our safety, compassion for the pain of others, all these are good reasons to make laws that protect people in their rights.
When the SEC needs to be deterring corporate wrongdoing, the 'penalty pilot' program sends the wrong message.
