| Site Index:  |
Department of Justice |
Back: Fed Agency News |
DOJ - General / Misc. Articles (DOJ): DOJ Threatens to Create
Racially Gerrymandered Voting Districts! (08/22/99) "Nobody knows exactly what the government will do. But if it decides that minorities have been denied power in a city in which two-thirds of the 27,000 residents are Latino, it could sue to carve the 4.5 square miles into separate political districts." That, of course, would be illegal according to Supreme Court rulings on the issue. "Although Latinos make up two-thirds of the population, they constitute considerably less than two-thirds of the U.S. citizens in the city. Exactly what proportion are citizens is unknown." According to the LA Times story, Ramon Rodriguez, a local Latino activist estimates that only 50% of the Latinos in Santa Paula are citizens of the U.S. The Times quotes Mr. Rodriguez as saying that he doesn't think it matters. (!) "[T]he police chief and city clerk are Latino. The two local school boards are controlled by Latinos, who hold 3-2 majorities. Some say these examples weaken the argument that Latinos lack political power in the city."
"We're supposed to be one and the same," she [Connie Reed, a white
businesswoman] said. "It shouldn't matter what race is in [office]. Something like
this [DOJ probe] divides our town more than it's already divided." (LA Times
08/22/99 by Margaret Talev) (DOJ): 'Diversity' Winning Against Equal Protection! (05/25/99 - dead link) "The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that such preferences for university admissions are unconstitutional. Voters in California and Washington state referendums voted overwhelmingly to end them in all state services, including college admissions, and other state referendums are pending. The liberal civil rights lobby warns luridly of ``the return of Jim Crow'' and its conservative opponents, ahem, crow that the ideal of ``a color-blind America'' is coming closer. And President Clinton vows to fight to the death for them. "...last week the civil rights office of the U.S. Justice Department issued guidelines that would support the Texas legislature's end-run around anti-discrimination law--and do much else besides. It ruled that if minority students perform less well on average in standardized test scores--as they do--then those tests cannot be used in determining college admissions in either public or private institutions. (See Also: Dept. of Education Declares SAT, ACT Racist!) "Overnight this ruling overturned national procedures for college admissions that were designed to produce results rewarding individual effort and ability regardless of race or gender. Even university administrators, who are almost invariably supporters of racial preferences, believe this ruling to be legally flawed. And it is plainly designed to circumvent court decisions and the decisions of voters that have overturned racial preferences--by making racially neutral and merit-based selection procedures illegal.
"In short, we are witnessing a profound battle between two visions of America--one
based on the idea of individual rights supported by a multi-ethnic majority of the
American people, the other based on a permanent regime of racial preferences, a k a
``diversity,'' supported by the political class of politicians, bureaucrats and
lawyers." (Chicago Sun Times 05/25/99 by John O'Sullivan) (DOJ): Are sports teams with Indian names really a
federal civil rights crime? (02/19/99) "But the Libertarian Party says the investigation demonstrates how preposterous civil rights laws have become, and proves that Department of Justice bureaucrats are completely out of control. "Civil rights allegations have become a modern-day witch-hunt -- if saying so isn't a crime against our wiccan friends," said Steve Dasbach, the national director of the party. "What this case shows is that the Department of Justice has become a bigger threat to our civil liberties than any high school sports team is to our civil rights." "What put the Department of Justice on its current warpath? The mother of one Native American student at Erwin High School in Asheville, North Carolina wrote to federal bureaucrats, complaining that her son was "deeply offended" because school teams were named the Warriors and the Squaws. "The Department of Justice jumped on the case, sending a detailed list of questions to the school administration about whether a "racially hostile environment" had been created for the 1% of students who are Native American. "Department of Justice lawyers demanded to know the history of the team names; the origin of its Indian mascot; the school's policies on racial discrimination; and the racial breakdown of all students, faculty, and administration. If the DOJ decides to prosecute, the school could lose $8 million in federal funds and spend as much as $500,000 in legal fees. "Interestingly, the "offended" student didn't allege that he had suffered any harm from the racially hostile environment -- he graduated in 1998 and is now employed.
"No wonder Americans have an us-versus-them attitude about the federal government:
They see a $15 billion federal agency, with armies of lawyers at its command, go after a
high school in a case where even the so-called victim doesn't claim to be a victim,"
said Dasbach. "Apparently, hurt feelings are now a federal crime, and having a
politically incorrect sports mascot is illegal behavior." (Libertarian Party,
contact George Getz, Press Secretary Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222 E-Mail: 76214.3676@Compuserve.com) Clinton defies GOP with Lee recess appointment (08/04/00) "President Clinton Thursday [Aug. 3, 2000] named Bill Lann Lee to head the Justice Department's civil rights division, ignoring warnings by Senate Republicans against a recess appointment of the controversial lawyer who failed to win Senate confirmation for the post. "The recess appointment, made while Congress is on its summer break and Republicans are nominating their 2000 presidential candidate in Philadelphia, allows Mr. Lee to serve through the remainder of Mr. Clinton's term despite his failure to win Senate confirmation. "Critics have called the appointment a flagrant violation of the Constitution, which gives the Senate the power to "advise and consent" on major executive appointments. "Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, said Mr. Clinton was playing partisan politics, adding that the timing of the appointment served as further evidence that he was "intent on dividing our people rather than uniting us for the common good." "Mr. Hatch said at the time that during Mr. Lee's tenure at Justice, the department had advocated the "same policies that initially led to his failure to be confirmed" in 1997.
"The Center for Equal Opportunity and the Institute for Justice said in a report that
Mr. Lee had a "long record of promoting discrimination on the basis of race and sex
through preferences and quotas," despite Supreme Court decisions overturning such
policies." (Washington Times 08/04/00 by Jerry Seper)
Clinton Bypasses Hill With Appointment Move (08/03/00 - no link) WASHINGTON (Associated Press) - "President Clinton removed ''acting'' from Bill Lann Lee's job title at the Justice Department, appointing him Thursday as assistant attorney general for civil rights during a congressional recess. "The White House announcement, made without comment while Clinton was playing golf, comes nearly three years after the president named Lee as his main civil rights enforcer on an acting basis to circumvent heavy Republican opposition. "Thursday's action allows Lee to hold the post through the end of Clinton's term in January without sending his nomination to Congress for approval.
"Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, whose committee would have sat in
judgment on a Lee nomination, said Clinton was the one playing partisan politics,
installing Lee during the Republican National Convention. ''The timing of this
decision serves as further evidence of what we have come to know is true: The Clinton-Gore
White House is intent on dividing our people rather than uniting us for the common good,''
Hatch said." (Associated Press 08/03/00 by Sonya Ross)
(DOJ) Will Senate
Roll Over and Accept Lee This Time? (Mar. 1999)
John Dickerson, Time Magazine's congressional reporter, says 'The formal renomination of
Lee now is a testing of the political waters by Clinton.' The President is betting
that Lee will be an easy pickup this time because the Republicans are not in a strong
position to put up a fight. The White House figures that the GOP has spent its ammunition
on impeachment, meaning that what Republicans currently need "is a record of
achievement, not another record of attack," says Dickerson. (based on Time Magazine,
by Alain L. Sanders) (DOJ) Bill Lann Lee's First Year
(1997 - 1998): Racial Quotas Du Jour?!
(DOJ) Defying the Rule of
Law (Feb. 1999 - Institute for Justice) "More than a year has passed since an unprecedented set of circumstances placed Bill Lann Lee in command of the nation's most powerful civil rights law enforcement arsenal. The president nominated Lee, the former western regional counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. It was the third consecutive time that President Bill Clinton tapped someone from [NAACP's] LDF for that position.
"Lee brought with him a controversial record of judicial activism and support for
racial preferences, and following a lengthy hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee,
he failed to win majority support. Democratic members of the Committee filibustered their
own President's nominee, and the nomination went no further. Bypassing the Senate's
constitutional "advise and consent" role, President Clinton appointed Lee
"Acting" Assistant Attorney General on December 15, 1997, a status Lee still
holds more than a year later despite its doubtful legality." (Roger Clegg,
Clint Bolick, Feb. 1999) (DOJ) Black Leadership Network Opposes Bill
Lann Lee 1999 Re-Nomination (02/18/99) " 'Bill Lann Lee's rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul policies are not only out of step with the mainstream of the American polity, but are out of step with the majority of the Democratic Party as well,' said Project 21 member Council Nedd, the director of government affairs for Citizens Against Government Waste.
"Mr. Lee's nomination to become the nation's chief civil rights enforcer deadlocked
in the Senate Judiciary Committee in November of 1997 due to his controversial support for
race-based preferences in hiring, government contracting, education and voting laws.
President Clinton then chose to bypass the Senate's constitutionally mandated 'advise and
consent' role in the nomination process in December of 1997 by appointing Mr. Lee as the
'acting' head of the Division." (Project 21, 02/18/99) (DOJ) GOP
again to oppose nominee (02/17/99)
"When first nominated in 1997, Lee encountered heavy criticism from conservatives who
charged that he was a zealous promoter of racial preferences in affirmative action
cases." (Times Union, 02/17/99, by Mark Helm) (DOJ) White
House Attempts to Defend Lee's Re-nomination (02/16/99) "Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, urged Clinton on Tuesday to nominate 'a confirmable candidate' for the civil rights post, saying Lee has already been considered. 'During Lee's tenure, the Justice Department has advocated the same policies that initially led to his failure to be confirmed as assistant attorney general,' Hatch said. He said he told deputy attorney general Eric Holder last week that Lee's temporary appointment has exceeded 14 months in violation of a law on federal vacancies that Clinton signed in October. "Two [anti-quota] conservative groups, the Institute for Justice and the Center for Equal Opportunity, issued a report Tuesday concluding that, under Lee, the Justice Department has 'continued to defend the constitutionally indefensible' when it comes to affirmative action.
" 'We do not suggest that every action ... exceeds Lee's proper discretion as the
nation's foremost civil rights law enforcement official,' the report said.
'But the pattern is unmistakable: Lee sides with racial classifications in government
contracting, employment, voting and education in nearly every instance, placing the
federal civil rights arsenal at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court's repeated pronouncements
that racial classifications are presumptively impermissible.' " (AP, via Las Vegas
Sun, 02/16/99) (DOJ) Racial Quota Foes Oppose Bill
Lee (02/16/99) "More than a year ago, Republican senators blocked Lee's nomination, charging his views on affirmative action amounted to support for quotas and racial preferences. Despite the setback, Attorney General Janet Reno named Lee to fill the same post he was denied, on [a seriously questionable] 'acting' basis. "At a Tuesday press conference on Capitol Hill, former Attorney General Edwin Meese III attacked as 'a subterfuge' the appointment of Lee to head the civil rights division, despite the Senate's deadlock over the nomination. Conservative activists Clint Bolick and Roger Clegg issued a report accusing Lee of continuing to back racial preferences through a series of Justice Department lawsuits filed during the past year.
" 'Sadly, in all too many instances, Bill Lann Lee has wielded the resources of the
Civil Rights division to pursue racial preferences in government contracting, employment,
voting and education,' Bolick said." (CNN, 02/16/99, by Terry Frieden) Editor's Note: The U.S. Department of Justice enforces a Good Racial Profiling doctrine which states that any crime statistic, employment test, academic test, or personnel policy on which protected minorities perform more poorly than whites and Asians constitutes a de facto case of racial discrimination. Conversely, DOJ advances the notion that whites and Asians are "privileged" and therefore are never discriminated against. Racial Profiling? You can only run so far from the truth. (10/16/00) [By an anonymous officer of the Los Angeles Police Department as published in the National Review.] "There was much discussion of racial profiling in last week's presidential debate, but after scouring the transcript in search of some honesty on the subject, I've come away disappointed. A good friend is a psychiatrist here in Los Angeles, and when he treats patients prone to rationalization he falls back on a time-tested maxim: You can only run so far from the truth. "And the truth, gentle readers, is that in the United States of America in the year 2000 A.D., certain ethnic groups tend to violate the law in numbers far in excess of their representation in the population. The debate may rage as to why this is so, but only after accepting the truth can honest dialogue take place. "Don't take my word for it. Go to the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Statistics website and look up Tables 40 and 46 [you may download the report in Acrobat PDF format from http://www.adversity.net/DOJ Crime Stats/DOJ_1998_crime_stats.pdf ], where you will discover that in 1998, the most recent statistics available, blacks committed about 38 percent of the reported robberies while making up about 13 percent of the population. Consider further that nearly all of those robberies were committed by black males between the ages of 15 and 24, and you'll come to the realization that a tiny demographic group is responsible for a whole lot of trouble out there. "These statistics are based on the perceived race of the perpetrators as reported by the victims. To disbelieve these numbers, you must subscribe to the phantasmagoric notion that robbery victims, a large number of whom are black themselves, are so consumed with racial animus that they will falsely describe their assailants to the police so as to further a negative stereotype." (The opinions expressed are solely those of the
anonymous LAPD officer, and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.)
[National Review 10/16/00 by Anonymous.] DOWNLOAD 1998 Dept. of Justice
Racial Crime Statistics in Adobe PDF Format: END of DOJ Fed News Page. |
