White House Owes Response To Petition To Fire Prosecutor Of Aaron Swartz

I'm sorry, but this has to be said:<p>The White House doesn't owe you shit.<p>They set up this petition system to expand the illusion that somehow the system is working for its constituents. It is not, and it was not designed to. The system makes decisions so you don't have to. It's better this way.<p>The fact of the matter is that these prosecutors were doing their job, which is to apply as much pressure as needed to achieve a negotiated prison term (a win), and they did it a little too well for our comfort. The White House will not speak against these actions because these actions benefit the White House in the vast majority of cases.<p>If you want things to change, change the system. Lobby against the CFAA. Lobby for rules to enforce ethical use of prosecutorial discretion. Protest. Volunteer for candidates that oppose these practices. Don't think that clicking a "Like" button is going to change anything, because if the White House petition system actually changed anything, it wouldn't exist.<p>If you want to change the system, don't ask the system to change. Change it yourself.

&#62;“Heymann saw Aaron as a scalp he could take,” she wrote. “He thought he could lock Aaron up, get high-profile press coverage, and win high-fives from his fellow prosecutors in the lunchroom. Aaron was a way of reviving Heymann’s fading career. Heymann had no interest in an honest assessment of whether Aaron deserved any of the hell he was being put through.”<p>I get that this girl is upset and feeling vocal, but she's drawing these conclusions and painting this picture for a person about which she knows nothing. I feel like everyone is doing this a lot lately: talking about Aaron like he is a simple, sweet martyr, and about Heymann like he's the warden from Shawshank Redemption.<p>I'm really trying not to come off as contrarian for contrarian's sake, but this kind of demonizing seems really counterproductive to me. It goes without saying that the prosecutors of this case took it too far, and that the justice system is incredibly unbalanced. Why can't those facts alone be enough without turning the involved people into charicatures?<p>Everyone was playing their part, and it got messy. It's like Tommy Lee Jones responding to Harrison Ford's "I didn't do it!" in <i>The Fugitive</i>: "I don't care." I doubt Heymann was sitting in his office cackling about "scalping" Aaron. It was just another case on his docket that he was trying to put to rest. The real problem is that his incentive is not to be fair or find truth, but to convict and incarcerate at all costs.

One important distinction that this article misses completely is that Mr. Heymann is a civil service employee whereas Ms. Ortiz (his boss and supervisor) is a political appointee. The Executive branch is perfectly within it's rights to fire a political appointee at any time for any reason, but would have to show cause to terminate a civil servant. This system exists to prevent partisan patronage at the federal level from bringing the government down on a regular basis.<p>Paradoxically this means that any effort to remove Mr. Heymann is made more difficult by the existence of a qualified petition for his removal. He would have to have made overt and on the record declarations of ill intent and bad faith for the Obama administration to remove him at this point. Ms. Ortiz on the other hand, could be asked to depart at any point. Although it seems unlikely to happen before she testifies to congress, and is in any event unlikely to happen unless the Presidents political calculations suggest that her absence will allow him to access resources ( of political support ) that are necessary for him to achieve his agenda.

Author seems mistaken. Ortiz hit 25,000 before the White House raised the required amount to 100,000.<p>Since the Heymann petition didn't reach the mark before the cap was raised, there are another 75,000-or-so to go. Ortiz was grandfathered in.<p>edit: I thought only completed petitions were grandfathered in, but it appears I'm wrong and just having a petition started before the change is sufficient for grandfathered-status.

It will be very interesting to see the administration's response, which is, remember, all that's promised.<p>When they were in the early decision phase that resulted in the petitions website, they certainly would have realized that such a system would very quickly become overrun with pleas for Presidential Pardons, intercession in ongoing investigations/prosecutions, and, as in this case, for punishment of a government employee who is perceived to abuse their power. That's what the thresholds are for.<p>They knew this would happen; and they're already prepared. I predict the response will boil down to "we can't interfere with the machinery of Justice, etc." Their reply will give a lot of good points to support this, but will subtly rely on the people confusing prosecutors as being Judicial rather than Executive employees. Mr. Heymann and Ms. Ortiz will keep their jobs, though Heymann may no longer be put on "hacking" cases.

No one killed Aaron Swartz. He killed himself. He could have become a political prisoner. He might have beat the charges. He would have gotten out eventually. The only cause he is a martyr to now is mental illness.

If all it does is provide a talking point to Ortiz' political campaign opponents, it's worth signing these petitions.<p>A signature on Heymann's petition contributes to undermining Ortiz' political aspirations, so it's worth it to sign this petition too.<p>No Ortiz political opponent will ignore this rock to throw.

I remember reading sometime back that White House had increased the threshold to 100,000 signatures. The 'Fire Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Heymann' has got only 25,760 signatures as of now. Am I missing something?