Attorney General William Barr on Wednesday announced that Operation Legend, a Trump administration initiative to combat violent crime that started in July, has led to more than 5,000 arrests, according to a Department of Justice statement, The Daily Caller reports.
Since the start of the controversial operation, more than 5,000 individuals have been arrested in nine cities, of the 5,000 approximately 1,057 have been charged with federal offenses. Approximately 568 of those defendants have been charged with firearms offenses, while approximately 411 have been charged with drug-related crimes and approximately 247 for homicide.
According to the statement, over 2,000 firearms have been seized; and nearly 22 kilos of heroin, more than 15 kilos of fentanyl (enough to deliver more than 7.5 million fatal doses), more than 130 kilos of methamphetamine, more than 28 kilos of cocaine, and more than $7.3 million in drug proceeds have been seized.
Operation Legend has reached into states such as New Mexico, Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, and Indiana.
During a roundtable discussion with law enforcement Wednesday morning, Barr applauded the crime-fighting effort in St. Louis where Operation Legend began in August, and the city has seen a 49% decrease in homicides and rapes have decreased 38% since then, according to Barr.
The operation was named after LeGend Taliferro, a 4-year-old who was shot and killed June 29 while sleeping in his Kansas City home.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) launched “Operation Legend” with local and federal law enforcement to target violent crimes, which includes investigating LeGend Taliferro’s case in this operation.
According to The Daily Caller, this year, Kansas City has seen a 40 percent increase of homicides compared to last year. President Donald Trump promised to protect cities that have high rates of violent crimes and stated “Help is on its way.” Attorney General William P. Barr announced the start of the operation on July 8, 2020.
Is there any other remedy to keep enshrined the holy grail of rule of Law?
” More than 200 years ago, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of essays promoting the ratification of the United States Constitution now known as Federalist Papers. In explaining the need for an independent judiciary, Alexander Hamilton noted in The Federalist # 78 that the federal courts “were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and their legislature” in order to ensure that the people’s representatives acted only within the authority given to Congress under the Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution is the nation’s fundamental law. It codifies the core values of the people. Courts have the responsibility to interpret the Constitution’s meaning, as well as the meaning of any laws passed by Congress. The Federalist # 78 states further that, if any law passed by Congress conflicts with the Constitution, “the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.”
“Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposed that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.”
The American democratic system is not always based upon simple majority rule. There are certain principles that are so important to the nation that the majority has agreed not to interfere in these areas. For instance, the Bill of Rights was passed because concepts such as freedom of religion, speech, equal treatment, and due process of law were deemed so important that, barring a Constitutional Amendment, not even a majority should be allowed to change them.
Rule of law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are:
Publicly promulgated
Equally enforced
Independently adjudicated
And consistent with international human rights principles.
The courts play an integral role in maintaining the rule of law, particularly when they hear the grievances voiced by minority groups or by those who may hold minority opinions. Equality before the law is such an essential part of the American system of government that, when a majority, whether acting intentionally or unintentionally, infringes upon the rights of a minority, the Court may see fit to hear both sides of the controversy in court.”
United States Courts.