Free Markets, Free People

House Judiciary Committee to investigate DoJ issues surrounding New Black Panther voter intimidation case

Jennifer Rubin reports that the House Judiciary Committee under new Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) has issued its first oversight letter to the Department of Justice.  Subject?  The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case as race based enforcement guidelines within the DoJ.

To quote the letter:

"Allegations that the Civil Rights Division has engaged in a practice of race-biased enforcement of voting rights law must be investigated by the Committee."

Indeed.  He gives Holder and DoJ until the 21st to respond to a list of questions including whether Julie Fernandez of DoJ "explicitly or implicitly direct Voting Section staff not to enforce any section of any federal rights statute" or "not to enforce Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act."   This question stems from the claim by J. Christian Adams that Fernandez  directed DoJ attorneys "not to bring cases against black defendants for the benefit of white victims."

With an all Democratic Congress, DoJ was able to weather the storm these revelations brought as Democrats successfully blocked any attempts to look into the matter officially.  That has obviously changed.

Rubin makes some observations about the letter:

The letter is noteworthy on a number of levels. First, administration flacks and liberal bloggers have insisted that the New Black Panther Party case is much to do about nothing. But as Smith has correctly discerned, the issue of enforcement or non-enforcement of civil rights laws based on a non-colorblind view of those laws is serious and a potentially explosive issue for this administration. Second, Holder’s strategy of stonewalling during the first two years of Obama’s term may have backfired. Had he been forthcoming while Democrats were in the majority, he might have been able to soften the blows; Smith is not about to pull his punches. And finally, Smith is demonstrating the sort of restraint and big-picture focus that is essential for the Republicans if they are to remain credible and demonstrate their capacity for governance.

Bingo on all three.  A worthy issue to investigate, a worthy reason to investigate and it will indeed play to the benefit of Republicans and detriment of Democrats – particularly Holder – but also those who tried to wave it away as “no big deal”.



10 Responses to House Judiciary Committee to investigate DoJ issues surrounding New Black Panther voter intimidation case

  • They should also look into DOJ behavior surrounding the US Commission on Civil Rights investigation of this same topic.  J. Christian Adams was basically told that DOJ would not enforce the USCCR’s subpoena (even thought that’s their job) and that he basically didn’t have to appear before the Commission.  Christopher Coates was actually relocated by the DOJ so that he was outside the USCCR’s geographic region of subpoena authority.

  • Tomorrow’s NYT / Washington Post editorials, combined and pre-translated: “These investigations of loyal public servants in government are bad, and may be racist. Only investigations of the private sector and the military are good. The Republicans are hypocritical for doing this investigation after criticizing investigations by the Democrats. That has nothing to do with whether the Democrats’ investigations were appropriate or fair. If they criticized any previous investigation of any sort, they ought to lose their ability to do investigations. Especially of loyal public servants, as we said before.”

  • This SHOULD be a slam-dunk: the photo of uniformed thugs with a club standing outside a polling place is a powerful image that doesn’t really admit of any excuse or mitigating explanation.  However, I think Billy Hollis nails it: the dems and their mouthpieces in MiniTru will try to make this about anything and everything BUT the facts of the case.

    We shall see how successful they are.

  • The elephant in the room is the US Civil Right Commission.
    Viewed for a long time as “not a friend of conservatives,” it has, over the last two years, been neutered by the Obama Administration by their claims that the law governing the DOJ is more recent and therefore overrides the law setting up the USCRC.
    Perhaps it has outlived it’s usefulness.

  • Democrats everywhere are busy flagging copies of the video on Youtube as offensive as part of their censorship effort. 

    As for the media, they’ll take about the investigation and not touch on the actual event.  The essential outcome of Billy’s earlier comment. 

    • The other line is that “no one was harmed” as it was  polling area in a black neighborhood.

      • The guy who took the video was decidedly white.
        I saw it,   paramilitary hooligans with nightsticks don’t have any place at a polling location.
        Subsequent speeches by the same hooligan lead me to believe he’s every bit the racist the guy who took the video thought he was.

        • Throw in the mix that, as I understand it, a witness is a white man with a long history as a civil rights activist; he was outraged by the presence of an armed hoodlum of ANY color at a polling place, and it won’t be easy to smear him as a bigot.  Maybe the dems can use the Walpin strategy: “He’s crazy, so we don’t need to listen to a thing he says.”

          • In the discussion about the investigation, the hooligans, the video itself, and the witness will get next to no air time.