The Blog

The Voter Intimidation Case and the Blind Eye

Yes, the New Black Panther voter intimidation case is a story.

1:20 AM, Jul 17, 2010 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

There’s more still. There is reason to believe that senior Justice Department officials have offered misleading testimony about the facts of the case. Thomas Perez, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, told the Civil Rights Commission and Congress that he was unaware of claims that the Civil Rights Division under Attorney General Eric Holder is unwilling to pursue cases in which a minority is not the victim. But Adams claims that he and two other career attorneys told Perez just that – one day before Perez said he’d never heard such a thing.

(For a good summary of the Perez issue, see this post by Jennifer Rubin, who has driven the story from the outset. And for more background, read her comprehensive piece here.)

So it’s not that “the Justice Department” decided that “the facts and the law did not support pursing” the claims. The career attorneys in the voting rights division argued strongly – and believe to this day – that the facts and the law did support pursuing those claims. They were simply overruled by the Obama administration’s political appointees.

In sum, the facts of the case are simple. New Black Panther members were caught on videotape violating the law. The Justice Department had won a default judgment in the case. Obama administration political appointees rejected that victory in favor of a non-punishment punishment. A DOJ voting rights attorney resigned to tell his story. And it is possible – perhaps likely – that Obama political appointees did not tell the truth.

How is that not a story?

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers