Yesterday I noted that the Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder omitted a number of the Republican base's pet projects, most notably the infamous New Black Panther voter intimidation case, which conservatives have used to accuse the reformed Civil Rights Division of "politicization." The case, which was brought during the last administration, was dismissed after the transition.
Civil-rights enforcement declined noticeably during the Bush years because ideologues were running the Division and politicized hiring was standard operating procedure. Conservatives have been using the New Black Panther case to turn the accusations back at the Holder Justice Department for its aggressive enforcement of civil-rights laws. The fight over the New Black Panther case has been, essentially, a tug-of-war between current and former employees of the Civil Rights Division over its proper role.
That's why it's so remarkable that not a single Republican senator mentioned the case, as yesterday was the deadline set by the Republican-controlled U.S. Civil Rights Commission for Holder to say whether or not any Justice Department employees would be made available for the commission's hearing next week. As Ryan Reilly reports, Holder didn't even dignify the request with a response:
The commission also announced today details about next week's hearing. Those testifying include Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.); Philadelphia Republican poll watchers Bartle Bull, Mike Mauro and Chris Hill; and former Assistant Attorney General and Acting Associate Attorney General Gregory Katsas, now of Jones Day.
So basically the hearing will consist mostly of a group of angry conservatives railing against "reverse racism." In the past, Senate Republicans have been willing to play along with this nonsense -- the nomination of current Civil Rights Division head Thomas Perez was held up in part because of Republican "concerns" over the case. But yesterday it didn't get so much as a mention, which suggests Senate Republicans aren't willing to waste much more time on it.
The fight over whether the Civil Rights Division is a political fiefdom to be exploited by the party in power or exists to protect the civil rights of all Americans appears to have been settled in the latter's favor. If you've been paying attention to the division's work in Mississippi or Louisiana over the past few days, you know that's a good thing.
-- A. Serwer
