In Hennepin County, Minnesota, a new policy requires prosecutors to consider a defendant's race and age when negotiating plea deals, a move that has sparked debate over its constitutionality. The policy, set to take effect on April 28, aims to address racial disparities in the justice system by acknowledging unconscious biases that lead to unequal outcomes. Critics argue that the policy contradicts Minnesota's sentencing guidelines and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Proponents, however, argue that it seeks to avoid creating racial disparities rather than exacerbating them. The policy change follows controversy over the county attorney's office's handling of several high-profile cases, including a decision not to criminally charge a state employee accused of vandalizing Tesla vehicles, opting instead for a diversion program to preserve employment and ensure restitution.

Hennepin County's new plea deal policy mandates consideration of a defendant's race and age, highlighting efforts to address racial disparities in the justice system.

Critics, including local attorneys, express concerns over the policy's constitutionality, arguing it conflicts with the Equal Protection Clause and established sentencing guidelines.

Proponents defend the policy by emphasizing its intention to reduce racial disparities, not to create them, aligning with the goal of achieving safe and equitable outcomes.

The county attorney's office, led by Mary Moriarty, faced previous criticism for its handling of cases, including offering plea deals to murder defendants and choosing diversion over charges for a Tesla vandalism case.

The policy is part of a broader trend influenced by groups linked to liberal donor George Soros, who supports progressive prosecutors focused on reforming criminal justice practices.

The decision to adopt this policy has been met with mixed reactions, reflecting ongoing debates about the role of race in the legal system and its implications for fairness and justice.

The controversy underscores the challenges in balancing efforts to address systemic bias with adherence to constitutional principles and established legal frameworks.