Wednesday, November 24, 2010

DOJ and the New Black Panther Party Litigation An Interim Report

This 144 page report is detailed and repetitive as all legal documents tend to be. In effect the commission reported that they cannot reach a conclusion because Holder and the DOJ are stonewalling them. It is ironic that the DOJ would be in charge of enforcing any subpoena against themselves. Looks like a case of the fox guarding the hen house.

We have an Administration running roughshod over our liberties with no one to protect us. What happened to openness and transparency? The only answer is to rid our Nation of this Chicago blight and regain control in 2012.

Although the U.S. Department of Justice has cooperated with many previous
Commission investigations and requests, the DOJ has an inherent conflict of interest when it would prefer not to cooperate fully with the Commission’s investigations of DOJ actions. In the NBPP investigation that is the subject of this report, the Department of Justice refused to
comply with certain Commission requests for information concerning DOJ’s enforcement actions, and it instructed its employees not to comply with the Commission’s subpoenas for testimony.

Moreover, the Department’s denial of the Commission’s request for the appointment of a special counsel to help resolve the discovery disputes in federal court was communicated by a career attorney without addressing or acknowledging the Department’s conflict of interest and without any indication the Commission’s request was ever brought to the attention of the Attorney General.


Congress should consider amendments to the Commission’s statute to address investigations
in which the Attorney General and/or the Department of Justice have a conflict of interest in
complying fully with the Commission’s requests for information. Options to address a
potential conflict of interest might include the following:

 Enactment of a statutory procedure by which the Commission may request the
Attorney General to appoint a special counsel with authority to represent it in federal court, which request the Attorney General must personally respond to in writing
within a specified period of time.

 Enactment of a statutory provision to clarify that the Commission may hire its own
counsel and proceed independently in federal court if the Attorney General refuses to
enforce a subpoena or other lawful request, especially those directed at the
Department of Justice, its officers, or its employees.

 A conscious decision not to alter the Commission’s statute or a statutory confirmation
that the Attorney General and Department of Justice can act against the
Commission’s interest without any particular explanation.

[Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in
favor; Comissioners Melendez and Yaki voted against; Vice Chair Thernstrom was absent.]

Read full report here.

No comments:

Post a Comment