President Obama’s recent decision on the torture memos (to release the memos, but not to prosecute the authors), though dissatisfying to many, is politically a good compromise.  It partly addresses the need for accountability for Executive Branch abuses by exposing public officials and their support of torture.  The president’s decision not to investigate and prosecute further, though not the ideal solution to upholding the rule of law, will spare the country and Congress from a protracted political argument that would prove to be a needless distraction.

Though some in the administration have justified the end of the torture policy as a way to deprive al-Qaeda and its sympathizers of a recruitment tool, it’s hard to believe that suicide bombers are recruited to their cause solely because of a far-off country’s limited violation of the Geneva Conventions.  That said, it is hypocritical for the former vice-president Dick Cheney to demand the full release of all the memos that might suggest the efficacy of torture.  During much of his tenure, he defended the administration’s secrecy as necessary for national security.  How quickly he changes his mind when it suits his political opinion.

Even if CIA records reveal the efficacy of torture (we believe the CIA can probably torture information out of a suspect provided they find the right suspect), that does not make it right.  Mr. Cheney’s utilitarian argument for torture is wrong: we cannot sacrifice human rights in the pursuit of terrorists.

We agree with the president’s decision—certainly a difficult decision for him—to move on.