WOLF STATEMENT BEFORE U.S. CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION HEARING
ON DISMISSAL OF VOTER INTIMIDATION CASE AGAINST MEMBERS
OF NEW BLACK PANTHER PARTY
Washington, D.C. – Rep. Frank Wolf
(R-VA) today delivered the following statement before the U.S. Civil
Rights Commission at a hearing looking into the dismissal of a voter
intimidation case involving members of the New Black Panther Party at a
polling place in Philadephia in November 2008:
“Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, I want to thank you for the
opportunity to testify today. I have several
documents I would like to submit for the commission’s record as part of
my testimony. (NOTE:
Documents are online at wolf.house.gov/oversight)
“As the former chairman and current ranking member on the House
Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations subcommittee, which has
jurisdiction over the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, I am very
familiar with the commission’s essential role in ensuring the integrity
of our nation’s civil and voting rights laws.
“As you well know, the commission has an important special statutory
responsibility to ‘investigate voting rights deprivations and make
appraisals of federal policies to enforce federal voting rights laws.’
Congress instilled this independent oversight responsibility of
the commission in statute: ‘All Federal agencies
shall fully cooperate with the commission to the end that it may
effectively carry out its functions and duties.’
I would remind the Attorney General that this includes the commission’s
authority to subpoena witnesses.
“I appreciate your efforts to investigate this unexplained dismissal of
the U.S. v. New Black Panther Party case, which has serious and
dangerous consequences for future voter intimidation enforcement.
I am a strong supporter of the Voting Rights Act, which is why I
was so deeply troubled by Justice’s questionable dismissal of such an
important voter intimidation case in Philadelphia, where, it should be
noted, I grew up and my father was a policeman.
“My commitment to voting rights is unquestioned.
In 1981, I was the only member – Republican or
Democrat – of the Virginia delegation in the House to vote for the
Voting Rights Act and was harshly criticized then by the editorial page
of the Richmond Times Dispatch, the state’s leading newspaper.
I was criticized, too, in 2006, by another state newspaper
when I supported the act’s reauthorization.
“From the beginning, I have asked the question: why did the department
dismiss this serious case? Look at the facts.
If this is not a clear case of voter intimidation, I do not know
what is. The public can view video of the
incident as well as other examples of the party’s intimidation in a clip
from National Geographic Channel documentary, titled ‘Coming to A
Polling Place Near You, posted on the Web at:
www.electionjournal.org.
“My concerns have only been compounded over the last year in light of
the department’s obstruction of oversight investigations by the Congress
and this commission. The actions of the attorney
general to allow the department’s obstruction of this commission’s
investigation are puzzling. I believe he is
undermining the federal oversight of the Justice Department.
For nearly a year, I have been urging the department to release all the
documents surrounding this case and to make a genuine attempt to answer
the questions asked by members of Congress and this Commission.
My requests have been rebuffed at each turn.
Earlier this year, I introduced a Resolution of Inquiry that
would have compelled the Attorney General to release all requested
documents to the Congress. It was defeated in a
party-line vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
“I have urged the department’s Inspector General, Glenn Fine, on
multiple occasions to open an investigation into whether improper
political influence contributed to the dismissal of this case.
Unfortunately, Mr. Fine continues to maintain willful ignorance,
which I believe is an unacceptable abdication of his responsibilities as
Inspector General. Mr. Fine’s lack of action, I
believe, deserves the scrutiny of the Council of Inspectors General on
Integrity and Efficiency. I will be requesting
that the council investigate his failure with regard to this matter.
“What should be bipartisan support for robust voting rights enforcement
has become a shameful example of the types of partisan obstruction that
undermine our nation’s civil rights laws. Last
summer, The Washington Times reported that the department’s voter
intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party was dismissed over
the objections of career attorneys on the trial team, as well as the
chief of the division’s Appellate Division.
“According to the Appellate Division memos first disclosed in the Times
article, Appellate Chief Diana K. Flynn said that ‘the appropriate
action was to pursue the default judgment’ and that Justice had made a
‘reasonable argument in favor of default relief against all defendants.’
“Flynn’s opinion was shared by a second Appellate Division official,
Marie K. McElderry, who stated, ‘The government's predominant interest
is preventing intimidation, threats and coercion against voters or
persons urging or aiding persons to vote or attempt to vote.’
“Given these troubling disclosures, I have repeatedly called on the
attorney general to re-file this civil suit and allow a ruling from the
judge based on the merits of the case, not political expediency.
The career trial team should be allowed to bring the case again –
per the guidance I obtained from the Congressional Research Service’s
American Law Division in its July 30 memo – to allow our nation’s
justice system to work as it was intended: impartially and without bias.
“Sources within the department stated that Associate Attorney General
Thomas Perrelli, a political appointee, in conjunction with the acting
assistant attorney general for civil rights, Ms. Loretta King, and her
deputy, Mr. Steve Rosenbaum, overruled the career attorneys in the
Voting Rights section. Earlier this week, the
department finally acknowledged that the Attorney General was made aware
– on multiple occasions – of the steps being taken to dismiss this case.
“Why would the department’s political leadership overrule the unanimous
opinion of the career attorneys on the trial team and the appellate
division?
“Why would the department’s political leadership not seek a default
judgment to secure the maximum enforcement of the Voting Rights Act?
“The Justice Department is responsible for the vigorous enforcement of
civil rights statute. It is my understanding that
the career attorneys who originally brought this case continue to stand
by its merit. The politicization of the Justice
Department against career employees is absolutely wrong and both the
Congress and this commission ought to get to the bottom of this.
“I want to leave you with one last thought. It is
my understanding that the career Voting Section chief, Chris Coates,
offered a vigorous defense of the New Black Panther Party case at his
going-away luncheon earlier this year. According
to one report, ‘At the end [of the luncheon in his honor], the attendees
were startled when Coates pulled out a binder and began reciting a
written defense of his decision to file’ the New Black Panther case.
Coates reportedly stated: ‘I did my best to enforce all of our
voting statutes for all Americans, and I leave here with my soul rested
that I did the right thing to the best of my ability.’
“Although the Attorney General will not allow the career attorneys to
testify before this commission, I believe this anecdote helps to convey
the ardent opposition of the department’s career attorneys to the
dismissal of this voting rights case. I
again call on the Attorney General to comply with the
commission’s subpoenas and allow the career attorneys to testify.
“This commission and the American people should be insulted that the
Attorney General would only agree to allow Tom Perez, a political
appointee who wasn’t even employed at the department at the time of the
dismissal, to testify.
“I believe – and I believe the American would agree – that it is
imperative that we protect the right of every American to vote, a
sacrosanct and inalienable right of any democracy.
The career attorneys and Appellate Division within the department sought
to demonstrate the federal government’s commitment to protecting this
right by vigorously prosecuting any individual or group that seeks to
undermine this right.
“The American people deserve the kind of impartial leadership at the
Justice Department that will allow this case to go forward again – not
the kind of political leadership that has tilted the scales of justice.
“Thank you again for your commitment to voting rights enforcement and I
would be happy to answer any questions.”