Competing for the Sniper Trial

The Justice Department and prosecutors from Virginia and Maryland are engaged in unseemly jockeying over who will be first to try the accused Beltway snipers, John Muhammad and Lee Malvo. It demeans the justice system for the decision to turn on politics, prosecutorial ego or, worst of all, a capital-punishment bidding war, in which the case goes to the jurisdiction deemed most likely to execute the defendants. On the merits alone, Maryland, where most of the murders occurred, including the first one, has the strongest claim to try Mr. Muhammad and Mr. Malvo first.

 Prosecuting crimes has historically been a state responsibility, although there have always been exceptions. Crimes like stock fraud or immigration violations may call for special federal expertise. And there is a tradition, notably in the civil rights era, of relying on federal courts when state courts cannot be counted on to act fairly. But generally state courts are the place to start.

 This is consistent with Justice Department guidelines on capital crimes. In cases of shared jurisdiction, the federal government should indict only when its interest is manifestly greater. The interests of Maryland and Virginia, whose citizens were brutally gunned down, are easily the equal of the federal government's here.

 Of the two states, Maryland clearly has the stronger claim. The sniping spree began with a fatal shooting there on Oct. 2, and Maryland suffered the greatest loss of life: six sniper victims, as opposed to three in Virginia and one in the District of Columbia. The investigation began in Maryland, on the day of the first shooting, and ended there, when the defendants were taken into custody at a rest stop in rural Maryland.

 It is troubling that a key consideration appears to be which jurisdiction seems most likely to impose the death penalty. (The federal government has executed two people since 1976, Maryland three, but Virginia far outstrips both, with 86 executions.) There is also wrangling over how likely it is that Mr. Malvo, age 17, will be eligible for execution. Focusing on any penalty at this point smacks of Alice in Wonderland justice. "Sentence first," the Queen declared, "verdict afterwards." It is also the wrong way to decide. In our federal system, the states are free to make their own choices about sentencing. Maryland should not be discriminated against simply because it takes a more restrained approach toward capital punishment.

 As a practical matter, the Justice Department, which has custody of Mr. Muhammad and Mr. Malvo, will have a large say in which jurisdiction gets to try them first. Federal prosecutors will have a hard time showing that they have a more substantial interest in this case than the states. Given that, they should move to the end of the line, while offering Maryland all the help it needs in putting together its best case.