In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police, who investigate crime, and the district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.

So, we don't need civil suits here -- can Law & Order be wrong? After all, aren't these two members of "the people" or what? So, like there, where defense attorneys are mostly scheming sorts that make your asshole in-law look good, we need not have an additional check. Just look at that recent abortion episode -- heck the liberal gave the pro-life side "Brady" information that point of fact probably wasn't even relevant to the case. Can we really not trust Jack McCoy? And, if Kennedy writes an opinion saying so, Justice Alito can show how there are forty or so problems with the test.

It's not as if we don't wrongly hold people for extended periods of time based on fraudulent reasons aided and abetted by not properly informing the people or their representation (when they have some) of necessary information. Or -- Sotomayor must have been happy to escape needing to join an opinion here -- doing so without saying sorry or (shudder) compensating the person. What are we Canada? OTOH, in those cases we weren't really talking about "the people," but only "people." Still, the our government is restrained even as to them, even they have rights as "persons" under our laws.

Anyway, this case also shows the value of diversity on the courts. No, not just for wise Latinas. Justice Alito:

Clement suggests that the line for absolute immunity should be whether the fabrication "took place before probable cause attached," and Alito snaps back, "That's an entirely false picture of the way any sophisticated prosecution is handled today, completely false."

"Hey, Sonia, back me up here!"

-j