The first special prosecutor was appointed by President Ulysses S. Grant in 1875. Ever since, presidents of both parties have appointed special prosecutors and empowered them to operate with unusual independence. In short order, such appointments became a standard method for neutralizing political scandals and demonstrating the president’s commitment to the rule of law.
This long, mostly forgotten history shows that special prosecutors can do much to protect the rule of law under the right circumstances. It also shows that they are fallible. Many have been thwarted by the formidable challenges of investigating a sitting president and his close associates. Some have abused the powers entrusted to them. Yet such cases are rare.
At their best, special prosecutors function as avatars of the people channeling an unfocused popular will to safeguard the rule of law. But special prosecutors can function effectively only if the people care about holding the president accountable. If a president thinks he can fire a special prosecutor without incurring serious political damage, he has the power to do so.
Ultimately, only the American people can decide whether the president is above the law. At any given moment, this question can seem like a purely partisan one. All Americans, however, have a profound stake in preserving the “government of laws and not of men” passed down to us by previous generations.
Prosecuting the President provides the information every American needs to perform this civic duty intelligently and responsibly.