Black panther intimidating voters liquidating assets in

In a vote along party lines, the resolution was defeated 15-14.In July 2010, seven Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to committee chairman Senator Patrick Leahy, calling for a hearing on potential "widespread politicization and possible corruption" in the Justice Department in regard to its decision to narrow the case. Christian Adams (see below) that within the Civil Rights Division of the department there was "open hostility toward equal enforcement in a colorblind way", and requested a hearing to determine whether Adams' accusation was accurate.On August 28, 2009, in response to the complaints raised by Representative Smith, the Department of Justice's internal Office of Professional Responsibility opened an inquiry into the department's handling of the case.On September 13, 2010, the Department of Justice's inspector general Glenn A.Fine announced he was opening a second investigation, focusing not on the New Black Panther case specifically but on the more general question of whether the Justice Department enforces voting rights laws "in a non-discriminatory manner", The United States Civil Rights commission is an eight member panel.According to the New York Times, the commission is controlled by six-member conservative bloc that was appointed during the Bush administration.The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is a political controversy in the United States concerning an incident that occurred during the 2008 election.The New Black Panther Party and two of its members, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, were charged with voter intimidation for their conduct outside a polling station in Philadelphia.

black panther intimidating voters-5

In January 2010, after several unsuccessful attempts at obtaining the requested information from the department, Wolf sought a resolution of inquiry that would have forced the Justice Department to provide Congress with the details of why it narrowed the case.

The case precipitated deep divisions within the Justice Department.

Some employees felt that the voting rights act was passed because historically, it was minorities who had been disenfranchised and that the department should therefore focus on cases filed by minorities, while others felt that it was intended to protect all voters in a race-neutral manner.

Counter-accusations were made, including claims that the actual incident was relatively minor but had been blown out of proportion by individuals and groups with political motives.

Then-AG Eric Holder denied claims that his Justice Department considers the race of an alleged victim when deciding which cases to pursue.

821

Leave a Reply