Judges Accuse Atty General Holder of Disrespecting the Judicial System

Chief Judge Ricardo Hinojosa said Holder is setting a “dangerous precedent.”

sentencingcommissionarticle

But as Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse already pointed out, Attorney General Eric Holder doesn't follow the law, he advocates a certain point of view.

His own.

Like Obama, Holder makes up his own laws as he goes along, abusing power by acting like a tyrant.

The United States Sentencing Commission Thursday unanimously approved an amendment to revise sentencing guidelines for non-violent drug offenders, but not before one commissioner accused Attorney General Eric Holder of having “disrespected” the judicial branch’s role in sentencing reform.

“I regret that, before we voted on the amendment, the Attorney General instructed Assistant United States Attorneys across the Nation not to object to defense requests to apply the proposed amendment in sentencing proceedings going forward,” Judge William Pryor, Jr. said at a public hearing in Washington. “That unprecedented instruction disrespected our statutory role, ‘as an independent commission in the judicial branch,’ to establish sentencing policies and practices under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.”

In August, Holder revealed his “Smart on Crime” initiative, which includes recommendations for reduced sentencing, without consulting with the Sentencing Commission—an independent agency within the judicial branch tasked with setting such policies. Although the sentencing reforms themselves were not controversial, Holder’s cavalier approach to separation of powers, including a March memo in which he “instructed the Assistant United States Attorneys across the Nation not to object to defense requests to apply the proposed amendment in sentencing proceedings going forward,” irritated commissioners and alarmed supporters of constitutional separation of powers.

Chief Judge Ricardo Hinojosa concurred with Pryor that Holder is setting a “dangerous precedent.”

But the left isn't thinking in terms of precedents, except for itself, it is acting as if it will always be in power so it can trash all the safeguards against abuses of power.

William G. Otis a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said in a statement. “One way to consider this question is to ask whether, if the Attorney General ordered prosecutors to seek increased sentences that were, at the time, only preliminary, those applauding Mr. Holder’s actions would be as enthusiastic as they are today.”

They wouldn't obviously, but with the exception of a few men like Turley, the question doesn't even occur to them. Their use of power is inherently good. Anyone else's use of power is inherently bad.

They don't care about the law. They care about winning.

Share