Obviously U.S. state or federal prosecutors can be among the conspirators subjecting any given law enforcement whistleblower to retaliatory criminal prosecution.  In most instances such misdeeds are only under the color of law, i.e., they are the handy work of rogue government agents and do not constitute sovereign acts. However, according to the authors, an official or sovereign choice to “prefer” these oppressors is made each time a U.S. government agency opts not to thoroughly investigate their alleged whistleblower retaliation. The authors submit that all related convictions are accordingly void.  In addition to the “sworn public officer discrimination” they contend these convictions reflect, the authors propose that the corresponding role of after-the-fact accomplice to retaliatory selective prosecution offends due process provisions and extends beyond any government function cognizable under the U.S. Constitution.