The article argues that recent executive overreach and politicization have severely undermined established norms of U.S. civil-military relations. To restore professional standards, the incoming Congress must actively exercise its oversight powers, moving beyond mere criticism to demanding transparency in defense policy and personnel decisions. Key reforms include enforcing meritocratic promotion processes, requiring documented justification for senior officer removals, and preventing the partisan use of the military. These actions are crucial for bolstering public trust and ensuring the military remains a nonpartisan instrument of civilian control.
Restoring the Right to Trial by Jury: How the Right to Trial Act Helps Reclaim the Sixth Amendment
English Summary
The article argues that the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury has been effectively gutted by coercive plea bargaining, with 98.3 percent of federal convictions in 2022 coming from guilty pleas rather than trials. Using the case of Aaron Swartz—who faced a 15,000 percent sentencing increase for refusing a plea deal—as a focal point, the piece illustrates how prosecutors exploit charge stacking, mandatory minimums, and the resulting 'trial penalty' to pressure defendants, including innocent ones, into waiving their constitutional rights. The bipartisan Right to Trial Act (H.R. 9095) would require judges to review plea negotiation history when sentencing after trial and grant them authority to bypass mandatory minimums used punitively, representing a significant step toward rebalancing power between prosecutors and the judiciary in the federal criminal justice system.
中文摘要
本文主張，美國憲法第六修正案所保障的陪審團審判權，實際上已被強制性認罪協商制度架空。2022年聯邦定罪案件中，高達98.3%係透過認罪協商而非審判定讞。文章以乙亞倫·斯沃茨（Aaron Swartz）案為核心——他因拒絕認罪協商而面臨量刑幅度暴增15,000%——具體說明檢察官如何利用罪名疊加、強制性最低刑期，以及由此產生的「審判懲罰」機制，迫使被告（包括無辜者）放棄其憲法權利。跨黨派提出的《審判權法案》（H.R. 9095）將要求法官在審判後量刑時審查認罪協商歷程，並賦予法官繞過懲罰性強制最低刑期的權限，此舉代表在聯邦刑事司法體系中重新平衡檢察官與司法機關權力關係的重要一步。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that Donald Trump's unique and prolonged lame-duck period, coupled with domestic political pressures, makes him dangerously prone to international instability. Having exhausted major diplomatic gambits, Trump is expected to channel his energy into high-stakes, unilateral actions, primarily targeting adversaries such as Iran and Cuba. These potential actions—ranging from fresh strikes in the Persian Gulf to attempts at regime change—carry a significant risk of destabilizing regional security and triggering a global economic crisis. Policymakers must anticipate this pivot to high-risk foreign policy to mitigate potential international flare-ups.
-
3.
The Blue Wave signals significant voter frustration with cost of living and inflation, giving Congress a mandate to prioritize affordability and cost-reduction measures. Economically, the rapid build-out of AI data centers is creating localized stress, driving up skilled labor wages and straining resources, while also facing constraints from power grids and potential local regulatory backlash. Policymakers must manage this 'sequencing issue'—addressing rising costs before full productivity gains from AI can materialize—and anticipate shifts in global data center infrastructure as the market matures.
-
4.
The built environment workforce, comprising 15.3 million workers across 95 occupations, is foundational to modern infrastructure and economic stability. While highly paid, the workforce suffers from significant demographic imbalances, being disproportionately white and male, and often lacking clear career progression pathways. To prevent project delays and cost overruns, policy must mandate that capital asset owners treat labor market forecasting as core to project planning. Strategic interventions are required to strengthen career pipelines through robust apprenticeships, improve retention, and actively recruit younger and more diverse workers.
-
5.
The U.S. is drastically reducing core funding to multilateral institutions, withdrawing from numerous bodies due to perceived misalignment with national interests. While multilateral channels offer critical advantages—such as pooling resources for global public goods and managing risk in fragile settings—the U.S.'s funding remains heavily 'earmarked,' which effectively 'bilateralizes' the system and undermines shared burden-sharing. This practice, coupled with deep cuts, diminishes the multilateral system's effectiveness and efficiency, particularly in humanitarian aid. Policy recommendations suggest the U.S. must adopt a systematic, published strategy for aid channel choice and shift from restrictive project-level earmarking to broader thematic funding to restore global cooperation.