Americans need to have faith in their criminal justice system. We need to think that police officers enforce the laws of our cities, counties, states and nation evenhandedly. Maintaining this faith is even more important with our prosecutors — district attorneys, state attorneys general and U.S. attorneys.

In most cases, police officers' actions can be corrected if necessary. With prosecutors, it's very different. They have the power to bring criminal charges against individuals and to deprive them of their liberty unless a court or a judge disagrees. Given the enormous resources of prosecutors, even the wealthiest Americans cannot fairly fight back, so prosecutors' motives must be above question.

That is why it was disconcerting to read the latest report from the U.S. Justice Department's inspector general and the Office of Professional Responsibility. The 150-page report, released earlier this week, found that from 2003 until 2006, federal prosecutors and administrative judges were hired not for their knowledge of the law and their ability to fairly administer justice, but because of naked political considerations. They had to be sufficiently conservative and express loyalty to President George W. Bush.

That is a sad state of affairs for a federal agency that by custom and by law has been committed to protecting Americans from political influence in the justice system.

The report isn't a surprise. Its release comes one month after another report by the same Justice Department agencies found that political considerations played a part in selecting interns and candidates for an honors program. Another report will reveal findings on the firings of eight U.S. attorneys for political purposes.

This week's report, however, deals with civil service employees for whom the law clearly forbids using political considerations in employment decisions. Political appointees, such as the attorney general and his or her top aides, are a different matter.

Two top Justice Department officials with partisan backgrounds, who have both resigned, were named in the latest report as being responsible for instituting the partisan hiring practices. Kyle Sampson was Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' chief of staff. Monica Goodling was Gonzales' liaison to the White House. Both were political appointees and expected to be somewhat political.

But, as the report lays out, Goodling went beyond what the law allows in vetting candidates. During one candidate's interview, for instance, she scribbled, they were not "cons. On 'god, guns and gays'." She also did Google searches using key words such as "Bush, Gore, Republican, Democrat, Clinton, spotted owl, abortion, gay, gun and Florida recount" to vet candidates.

It clearly is good that these practices have been revealed. It's a shame, however, that the perpetrators may never be brought to justice, because they are no longer employees and the Justice Department does not have standing to prosecute them on the civil charges they would face.

REPRINTED FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.