The Prosecutorial Ethics of Investigating Police Shootings While Accepting Campaign Contributions from Police Unions

This Note is concerned with the unique conflict of interest presented when a prosecutor who accepts campaign contributions from a police union is responsible for investigating police shootings or other officer misconduct. It approaches the question by first for the Prosecution Function, and the National District Attorneys determine whether existing ethical guidance for prosecutors adequately addresses the issue. This Note finds that among these bodies of ethical guidance, the NDAA Standards offer the strongest basis for arguing that such conduct violates a prosecutor's ethical duties. However, none of these sources offer substantive criteria for determining when campaign contribution conflicts warrant recusal. These sources also do not offer a reliable procedural mechanism for ensuring that conflicted prosecutors will recuse themselves. To fill these gaps, this Note then looks to a separate body of ethical guidance-ethics rules for judges-that directly addresses conflicts of interest arising from campaign contributions. By applying the judicial disqualification model to the prosecutorial context, this Note illustrates measures that states can implement to prevent the appearance of impropriety in police-shooting investigations when the district attorney has accepted campaign contributions from police unions.