Choosing which laws to enforce and which cases to pursue is an inherently political decision. Resources are limited, and priorities must be set. But when electing law enforcement officials, especially a state’s highest law enforcement official, voters should ask candidates to base their decisions on the facts and the law. New York Attorney General Letitia James admitted last week that neither the facts nor the law guide her enforcement decisions. People paying attention to her past actions already knew this, but she has now confessed it in public.

In her debate with her impressive Republican challenger Saritha Komatireddy last week, the candidates were asked whether prediction markets should be regulated by the state or federal government. James answered by noting that her office had already sued two. Komatireddy deferred, noting that the case was pending and was an “important one,” and that she would have to “look at the facts and the law” before taking a position. James responded, “You don’t have to look at the facts and the law. All you have to do is study what they do. It is illegal in the state of New York.”