Eric Holder's Lawlessness

A long list of questionable legal decisions.

The country struggles with a flood of laws at a time when the chief law enforcement officer, Eric Holder, can’t be trusted. Many Americans and members of Congress are convinced the Attorney General is not only untruthful, but also has established his own view of justice rather than enforcing the laws on the books.

Holder has a long list of questionable legal decisions and misdeeds guided by his political and racial philosophies. As early as the end of the Clinton Administration, the then-Assistant Attorney General Holder was embroiled in the controversy surrounding the pardon of Democratic donor Marc Rich letting one of the FBI’s “most wanted” go free. A New York Times editorial called it a “shocking abuse” of power.

Holder’s tragic incompetence in the past several months has been revealed in the egregious case known as “fast & furious.”

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has now subpoenaed the Obama Administration over the “Fast & Furious” program that sent thousands of guns to Mexico under a Department of Justice botched program, as reported in October by The New York Times and other media.

Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif) has charged that Eric Holder provided misleading information to Congress in May about when he suspiciously said he first learned of the program. The guns were misdirected to Mexican drug cartels. A border agent was killed with one of the guns.

When asked if Holder had ever apologized to the agent’s family, the attorney general said he had not, acknowledging only that he regretted the incident. At least 59 members of Congress have called for Holder’s resignation.

Eric Holder refuses to proceed with an investigation and prosecution of the two black panthers who intimidated white voters outside of a Philadelphia polling place in 2008. He felt that to proceed with the case would "demean my people,” Holder declared. It is apparent our attorney general does not believe in equal protection under the law. He apparently prefers extra protection for some, but not others. Holder is obliged to enforce federal election laws in an objective, non-partisan, race-neutral manner. That seems a far cry from his intentions.

The Obama Justice Department is pushing to maximize turnout of Democrats in 2012 by filing “motor voter” suits across the country, complaining that state agencies aren’t circulating voter registration forms in social service agencies.

A lawsuit filed this summer against the State of Louisiana “is closely timed with a separate suit advanced by the notorious ACORN’s Project Vote affiliate and the NAACP," a Dec. 1 story said. Gov. Bobby Jindal’s officials have vowed to fight it, while “some states have rolled over to accept agreements that go beyond the scope of written law,” the American Spectator’s Spectacle blog said. Some fear the consent agreements with the Justice Department will block state officials from moving against instances of potential fraud.

Yet, as might be suspected, no effort is being made by Justice to enforce another section of the law requiring states to clean voter rolls to get rid of dead persons and ineligible felons.

Holder seems to believe that Justice needs to be “established” in American, rather than enforced. The case against the Black Panthers was dropped after a few months, even though a civil rights activist who witnessed the intimidation and insults to voters said it was “the most blatant case of intimidation he had ever seen.

Members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights gave Holder a sharp rebuke criticizing the Department’s dismissal of the Philadelphia voter intimidation case against what is called the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

A Heritage Foundation legal memorandum by Paul J. Larkin, Jr, a former Justice Department attorney, said the public needs to be made aware of the legislative issues that create “overcriminalization of American life.” Legislators enact broad laws hoping prosecutors will exercise good judgment, “which is not always the case.” Certainly true in Holder’s case.

Holder has “expressed veiled support” of the misnamed "Fairness Doctrine" to stamp out conservative media, as widely reported.

Most citizens were stunned when the Justice Department intervened on behalf of a Muslim school teacher in Cook County, IL. She claimed the school district was guilty of religious bias when the school district denied her request for a 19-day leave of absence to make a pilgrimage to Mecca, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Just as shocking was the fact that the district was forced to settle the suit in an example of political correctness gone wild. The teacher had worked at the school only a year, and she was the only math lab instructor at a period just before exams. The leave she wanted was not even in the limits for teachers under the union contract. The suit forced the district to pay the teacher $75,000 for a purported violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

It took 500 days before President Obama finally gave up on Holder’s determination to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court in Manhattan.

Just last month, the Justice Department expanded its battle against state immigration laws when it filed suit against Utah over a law that permits police to detain individuals they suspect  are illegal aliens. Utah is the fourth state being sued over immigration laws since Obama came to power.

The first suit was filed against Arizona last year. It resulted in court rulings that blocked key portions of that state’s anti-illegal immigration law. When Holder appeared before a congressional committee concerning the mass publicity and controversy of the Arizona law, Holder astonishingly admitted he had not even read the law he was seeking to overturn.

Incompetence reigns, prejudice rules in Holder’s world.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.


Wondering what happened to your Disqus comments?

Read the Story