DOJ Dodges On Black Panther Case As Civil Rights Commission Investigates

Who can forget the Black Panther’s voters intimidation tactics in Philadelphia in November 2008? Probably not anyone, for such blatant activity at a polling place would logically be a clear violation of the Voting Rights Act. And rightly so, the Bush Justice Department filed suit against them.

Michelle Malkin has the affidavit filed by civil rights attorney Bartle Bull in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which describes his eyewitness account of the intimidation by the Black Panthers. The man knows intimidation when he sees it. He has extensive experience as a civil rights attorney since the 1960’s.

EXCLUSIVE: Career lawyers overruled on voting case. Washington Times. May 29, 2009.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as “the most blatant form of voter intimidation” that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

EDITORIAL: Black Panthers but no white rights. Washington Times. May 14, 2010.

It was one year ago tomorrow that department officials overrode the advice of career attorneys, and of the department’s own appellate division, by dropping three of four charges in the Black Panther case and seeking an extremely limited injunction in the fourth. The case involved voluminous testimony that two Black Panthers – dressed in paramilitary garb while one brandished a nightstick – stood within arm’s length of a Philadelphia polling place while repeatedly using racial epithets and threats.

At an April 23 hearing held by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, witnesses agreed that both Black Panthers acted in concert, shoulder to shoulder, that they used verbal threats against black Republicans and against whites they called “white devils” and “crackers.” Two witnesses specifically said they saw would-be voters turn around and leave the area without voting after seeing these forms of intimidation. Former Acting Associate Attorney General Gregory G. Katsas testified that, “on its face, the complaint appears to involve a straightforward and overwhelmingly strong case of voter intimidation which [ordinarily] would have raised neither policy sensitivities nor the possibility of conflicting positions within [the department].” His conclusion: “The alleged conduct appears egregious and intentional.”

But despite the obvious intimidation that violated the law meant to protect all voters, the Obama DOJ has dragged its feet in subterfuge, while the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has tried to get answers to the flagrant impropriety of the case.

Christopher Coates, the multiple award-winning career attorney who oversaw the case before the Obama-Holder team exiled him to the hinterlands, made clear in a going-away speech just what he thought the Obama administration’s political considerations are. As reported (in close paraphrase) by the Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky at National Review Online, Mr. Coates suggested the agenda is “to enforce the provisions of the Voting Rights Act only for the protection of certain racial or ethnic minorities” and “to turn a blind eye whenever incidents arise that indicate that minority persons have acted improperly in voting matters.”

Mr. Coates brought up a raw reality. The Obama Administration, through its political appointee AG Holder, condones disparate application of the law based on race. Wait a minute. Wasn’t that what President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 was trying to make illegal through passage of the Voting Rights Act? The VRA is supposed to protect ALL voters.

Neither Mr. Coates nor his former colleagues who brought the case can tell their stories in public because the Justice Department, in violation of federal law, ordered them not to comply with the subpoenas of the Civil Rights Commission. This comes after the department falsely claimed that none of its political appointees had a role in the decision to drop the case, and then spent a full year stonewalling information requests from the commission, Congress and the press.

Clearly, it pays to have friends in high places who can circumvent the law.

Will the truth finally surface at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights hearings?

“Security” patrols stationed at polling places in Philly

November 4, 2008

See:

3 responses to “DOJ Dodges On Black Panther Case As Civil Rights Commission Investigates”

ProudMilitaryMom | May 14, 2010 at 6:05 pm |

Sad isn’t it? I was a poll worker out here in NW PA. Sad sad sad- black voters coming in, with envelopes, on the back of which was written – yup you guessed it- Obama.
many of these folks were illiterate and required the assistance of the election judge to cast their ballots. Which in itself generates a huge amount of paperwork.
Wonder what was IN those envelopes when they were given to these “voters”? We will never know= sad, so sad
thetownecrier | May 15, 2010 at 2:47 am |

Sad indeed, PMM. All registered voters should have the right to vote. What is troublesome is when people do not appear to know what they are doing, or literate as you mention. A very sad reflection upon the job this country does on educating its citizens. This does not even begin to touch on whether they really understand the issues a candidate stands on. Isn’t coming in with some sort of papers or lists with candidates names not allowed?
ProudMilitaryMom | May 16, 2010 at 1:40 am |

This is NW PA- very rural- but even here we were very aware of what was going on with all the Racism charges being hurled about.
Folks are allowed to be assisted in casting their votes – for example a legally blind person or someone who is quadriplegic. I guess illiterate now qualifies? (One of the consequences of the Voting Rights Act I believe.)
In our area, the candidates can have signs and canvassers almost to the door of the polling place which I do not care for- that is how those thugs got to be so close in Philly. If they had to remain say- 100 yards away it would be better.