The Department of Injustice

by Guy Benson

“If I have the honor of serving as Attorney General, I will uphold the trust you have placed in me…by ensuring that the [Justice] Department is an instrument of our great Constitution and the servant of the American people.” –Eric Holder; January 15, 2009

Nearly one year ago, Eric Holder swore an oath to defend the Constitution in carrying out his duties as the nation’s 82nd Attorney General. As the top law enforcement officer in the land, his charge is to mete out a brand of justice that is both rooted in the rule of law and thoroughly scrubbed of political influence. During his confirmation hearings, Holder pledged to preside over a department that is, at its core, a crucial “servant of the American people.” Almost a year has passed, and it’s become increasingly evident that Holder’s solemn sounding pledge represented little more than a platitudinous collection of empty words.

In practice, Holder’s DOJ has engaged in a series of noxious, politically motivated maneuvers—all under the watchful, legally-trained, and approving eye of President Barack Obama. In the span of eleven months, it has gratuitously dipped its toes into racial politics and considerably weakened US national security.

On Election Day 2008, two nightstick-wielding, paramilitary members of the New Black Panther party stood outside a Philadelphia polling place. They hurled racial slurs at voters and poll-watchers entering the building, serving up admonishments such as, “White power don’t rule here.” Another voter faced a charming greeting: “Cracker, you about to be ruled by a black man.” Witnesses said they feared for their physical safety, as one of the men repeatedly brandished a weapon. One couldn’t dream up a more clear-cut case of voter intimidation.

Career Justice Department attorneys agreed. They pursued the case and won a default judgment in federal court against the duo, only to see the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division inexplicably swoop in and drop the complaint months later. The Washington Times reported that although department brass nixed the charges, they had courageously allowed for “appropriately tailored injunctive relief” against one of the men—barring him from “brandishing a weapon outside a polling place through November 15, 2012.” Who knew that narrow injunctions were required to prevent anyone from waving around weapons and shouting racial insults at polling places? Justice, redefined.

This important article continues at

Comments are closed.