A reader points me to an article on conservative support for lawyers for indigent defendants.
Over the past decade, Republican lawmakers across the country have passed bills to reform public defender systems in Louisiana, Michigan and Utah; similar efforts are underway in Tennessee, Mississippi and Indiana. Meanwhile, legislators in blue states like California and Washington have failed to address their own dysfunctional systems. (There are exceptions. Left-leaning Colorado recently beefed up public defense funding, and New York state just promised funds for counties to meet higher statewide standards.) But the momentum on this issue is clearly being driven by red states, which have proved remarkably responsive to a constitutional argument that departs from progressive ideology that often emphasizes racial and class inequality.
The reader points out that in terms of the three-axes model, the Republicans are using conservative and libertarian rhetoric.
It’s not just that Republicans are using conservative and libertarian rhetoric but that they are doing so in service of something that is traditionally a progressive cause. In contrast, progressive rhetoric – particularly around racism – is arguably harming a cause that progressives would purport to champion by alienating would-be supporters.
Colorado does not lean left. It’s a very competitive state with a Democratic Senator and a Republican, along with 4 Republicans and 3 Democrats in the House.
I wonder how much of this is due to worse law in red states. Asset forfeiture is worse there (except MA).
Looking at the Institute for Justice’s rankings, there doesn’t appear to be any significant correlation between beinf a red or blue state and having a good or bad ranking. No idea where you’re getting this from.
http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/grading-state-federal-civil-forfeiture-laws/
This article seems to be another instance of a conventional progressive journalist being shocked, shocked that at least some Republican politicians are not, on every issue, the inhuman monsters she was told they were in college. However, I’m not clear on how adequately funding criminal defense for the indigent violates any conservative principles. Looks like a nonstory to me.
Also, these initiative are not going to change progressives’ self-serving perception that the courts are somehow biased – with or without adequate defense funding, the “disparities” progressives make hay complaining about will remain.
Progressives’ support for due process seems to depend on the identities of the accused and the (alleged) victim.