Archive for the ‘Eric Holder’ Category

Alabama’s 1st Black Congresswoman on the Sacrifices of the Elder Generation – NBC10 Boston

For the entire month of February, NBC will showcase essays about Black Americans who pioneered change in United States history during the Civil Rights Movement that led to nationwide desegregation. Pioneers include those who led local efforts to desegregate schools, professionals who forged ahead to become luminaries within their industries, and advocates who stoked the wave of change head-on in the nation's bid for racial justice and equality.

Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, Feb. 15, 2015.

I know that the journey I'm now on was only made possible because others made those sacrifices and took a journey.

U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, the first Black woman elected to Alabamas congressional delegation, reminds herself daily that her personal success is not her birthright; rather, that it was made possible only as a result of the blood, sweat and tears poured out by the women, men and children who came before her.

Sewell represents Alabamas 7th Congressional District, the focal point of numerous notable civil rights events in the 1960s. She thinks often about a tragedy that occurred just two years before her birth.

Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, talks about the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing by the Ku Klux Klan that killed four young girls, and how they were finally recognized for their sacrifice fifty years later.

It was Sunday morning, Sept. 15, 1963, a day that began like any other for parishioners of Birminghams 16th Street Baptist Church. It was the citys largest Black parish, and a hub of civil rights activism where leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. and Fred Shuttlesworth rallied the community. On this particular morning, 400 congregants had gathered to attend service.

Shortly before 10:30 a.m., a box containing more than a dozen sticks of dynamitedetonatedbeneath the church steps. Twenty-two churchgoers were wounded, but most poignantly, the lives of four young girls attending Sunday school were cut short.

The Four Spirits statue in Birminghams Kelly Ingram Park memorializes the victims of the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, Addie Mae Collins and Cynthia Wesley.

The murder of Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson and Cynthia Wesley, aged 11 to 14,shook the nation. But it wasnt until 2013 50 years after the Ku Klux Klan bombing that the victims were officially acknowledged for their sacrifice with what Sewell described as, "the highest civilian honor that Congress can bestow upon anyone."

Sewell was the sponsor of a bill thatposthumously awardeda Congressional Gold Medal to the girls, an action that came as the result of a sense of personal duty.

"I am a direct beneficiary of the [civil rights] movement. I know that I drink deep from wells that I did not dig," Sewell said. "I get to walk the halls of Congress today, because Addie Mae, Denise, Carole and Cynthia cannot [...] I walk in their shoes."

"The four little girls are a symbolic representation an embodiment of the promise of America, and their loss of life is a lost opportunity. [...] We, who have been beneficiaries, must make every effort to live up to the promise that their loss of life symbolizes."

Barack Obama designates the Congressional Gold Medal to commemorate the four young girls killed during the 1963 bombing of 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, as Birmingham Mayor William Bell, Dr. Sharon Malone Holder, Attorney General Eric Holder, Rep. Terri Sewell, Thelma Pippen McNair, Lisa McNair and Dianne Braddock look on May 24, 2013, in Washington, D.C.

Since becoming a congresswoman, Sewell has sought to make good on that promise, dedicating herself to elevating public awareness of the four Birmingham girls and other pioneers and milestones that helped forge new achievements in civil rights.

The year 2020 marked the 55th anniversary of "Bloody Sunday," a day of violence in which peaceful marchers were assaulted on their journey from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. They marched in defiance of the policies that kept them separate, but not necessarily equal, and above all else, protested for their right to vote.

Sewell again worked to honor those who opened doors for future generations of people of color. She mobilized fellow lawmakers and secured unanimous passage of a bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal to the "foot soldiers" who "were so brave to be brutally beaten on the Edmund Pettus Bridge."

Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, talks about the figures and events of the Civil Rights era that have become the foundation for Black success in the United States, including her own as the first Black Congresswoman for Alabama.

"We have tofind strengthin the fact that there were, in ageneration aheadof us, folks that didnt just complain, but they nonviolently organized and protested. [...] Its a testament to the enduring nature of our American values that are so enshrined in the Constitution," Sewell said.

It is the persistence and sacrifice of Selmas marchers and Birminghams four young "heroines," Sewell said, that make it possible for her to hold the keys to an office on Capitol Hill.

She contemplates that reality each day, and is encouraged and committed to ensuring that yesterdays sacrifices continue to create new opportunities for tomorrows youth: "We cannot rest on our laurels. We have to build upon [the sacrifices of others] and run our leg of the race with as much gusto ... empowered and emblazoned by the fortitude and bravery of those that came before us."

We cannot rest on our laurels. We have to build upon [the sacrifices of others] and run our leg of the race with as much gusto... empowered and emblazoned by the fortitude and bravery of those that came before us.

Comcast NBCUniversals Voices of the Civil Rights Movement platform honors the legacy and impact of Americas civil rights champions. Watch more than 17 hours of firsthand accounts and historical moments, online and on Xfinity On Demand.

Content owned and funded by Comcast NBCUniversal, parent company of this station.

The rest is here:
Alabama's 1st Black Congresswoman on the Sacrifices of the Elder Generation - NBC10 Boston

It Was Garlands Hearingbut Women of Color Were on Trial – The Nation

Judge Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden's pick to be attorney general, answers questions from Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Monday, February 22, 2021. (J. Scott Applewhite / AP Photo)

Merrick Garland is going to be confirmed as the next attorney general. Hes a white man who hasnt sent mean tweets to Republican lawmakers, which should make him palatable enough for Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Hes even likely to pick up some Republican votes: Hes an eminently qualified lawyer with an affable and inoffensive nature. The dude even got choked up during his hearing when speaking about how the country welcomed his grandparents from Europe, protecting them from anti-Semitism, and explained that being the attorney general would be the highest, best use of his skills to pay the country back. After finishing a pointed line of questioning, Republican senator and faux-folksy Rhodes Scholar John Kennedy let slip, I think youll make a fine attorney general before he cut his mic.

Hes getting confirmed. I tend to think of the attorney general as the most important cabinet appointment (come at me, State Department bros), and Biden nominated a guy who will be confirmed in a bipartisan walk. Its a victory for the new administration, but its a victory that rests on the banality of whiteness. Garlands status as a white man seems to be insulating him from the thing Republicans really want to do, which is to make it difficult for people of color to be in charge of the law.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, even members of the Sedition Caucus, didnt have anything they could use to poke holes in Garlands flawless rsum or anodyne public profile. So instead, they directed their attacks at the two women of color Biden has nominated to join Garland at the Justice Department: Vanita Gupta (nominated as associate attorney general) and Kristen Clarke (nominated to head the Civil Rights Division).

Senator Mike Lee did most of the hatchet work at the hearing. He asked Garland about statements attributed to Gupta and Clarke in the past: For Gupta, it was over her opposition to the confirmation of alleged attempted rapist Brett Kavanaugh; for Clarke, he had to go all the way back to her college career to drum up allegations of anti-Semitism and find an article she published that Republicans claim advocated for the superiority of the Black race over white people.

Lee didnt have any heat for Lisa Monaco, who has been nominated to be deputy attorney general, but is white.

It has become de rigueur for Republicans to allege or imply that Black civil rights activists, like Clarke, are secretly anti-Semitic. Clarke was the head of a campus organization at Harvard that invited Tony Martin, an anti-Semitic author, to speak out against Charles Murrays The Bell Curve. Clarke was 19 at the time, and she has said she made a mistake.

Perhaps if Clarke had tried to rape Martin, instead of inviting him as a speaker, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee would accept her apology for her youthful error. As it is, accusing Black people of anti-Semitism is just what they do now, while ignoring the actual anti-Semites in their party who march and commit hate crimes and come up with limericks about replacement theory.Current Issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

For Gupta, Republicans are trying to run the same game that appears to have successfully blocked Neera Tanden: That brown girl was mean to me.

Garland, to his credit, forcefully defended both women from Lees attacks. He didnt have to. That doesnt sound like a question for me, Senator would have been a perfectly acceptable non-answer to the filthy questions posed by Lee. I guess when Republicans make you wait five years to get a hearing, it makes you less inclined to let their crap slide.

But the Republican long game isnt just to trash the specific appointments of Gupta and Clarke, both of whom are as qualified as Garland is for the top job at the Justice Department, and more than qualified for the positions to which theyve been nominated. Their goal is to delegitimize the quest for social and racial justice and accuse anybody who strives for equality under the law to be harboring anti-white (which to them means anti-American) views.

Lee rounded out his questioning by asking Garland to give assurances that Garlands DOJ would protect religious people, as if its the attorney generals job to make discrimination against the LGBTQ community constitutional if people claim Jesus made them do it. Ted Cruz wasted all his time criticizing the politicization and weaponization of the Justice Department under (wait for it) Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. Presumably, Cruz was in Cancn during the tenures of Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr. Kennedy asked Garland to explain systemic racism and implicit bias in a truly bizarre set of questions that seemed almost like he was trying to bait Garland into calling him a racist.

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nations work.

And Tom Cotton asked: Are you aware President Biden has signed an executive order stating his administration will affirmatively advance racial equity, not racial equality but racial equity? Those two words mean the same thing, but clearly Cotton wanted the white people listening to think there is a difference. One thing I find curious about the most openly racist people in our society is that they are sure the real goal of racial justice is to treat white people like Black people have been treated, as opposed to the stated and logical goal of treating Black people like people-people, which is something this country has still never tried. Republicans like Cotton are truly only ever able to see racial equality as a zero-sum game: One race always has to be preferred over all others, in his mind. Its why Cotton will always fail.

Garland gave the right answers to all of these questions. He said he didnt see a difference between equality and equity. He wouldnt comment about Holder or Lynch. He didnt take Kennedys weird bait (I absolutely would have called Kennedy racist to his face, but I dont want to be AG), and instead gave a very legalistic definition of systemic racism. Like most judges who come before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland is more knowledgeable about the law than most of the people asking him questions.

But thats not why Garland will get Republican votes. Gupta or Clarke or any other Black or brown person could have answered these bad-faith questions with the same calm and clarity that Garland did, but Republicans would not have been persuaded. Even when people of color toe the line in front of Senate committees, most Republicans still find a way to vote against them. They call them toxic, or say they are divisive, or question their experience or qualifications. Those are all things Manchin (not a Republican, according to some), Susan Collins, and Mitt Romney have said about Tanden within the past week.

Some people will say Tanden is a special case, but just roll the tape back and look at what Republicans did to the last Democrat nominated for attorney general, Loretta Lynch. During her confirmation hearing, Republicans spent most of their time criticizing her predecessor, Eric Holder. Then they criticized her willingness to apply Obamas immigration laws. (Sessions, then still a senator, called those laws indefensible and her position very troubling.) Despite not being able to lay a glove on her during the hearing, Republicans refused to hold a vote on her appointment for six months. She was eventually confirmed with 10 Republican votes (five of those crossover senators are no longer in the Senate), over the loud objections of Sessions, Cruz, and Chuck Grassley, then chair of the Judiciary Committee.Related Article

Garland wont have as difficult a ride. Remember: The reason Mitch McConnell denied Garland a hearing when he was nominated for the Supreme Court was that he would have been easily confirmed, with support from Republican senators, if McConnell had ever allowed his nomination to come to a vote. The kinds of games Republicans play just dont work on white male cis-het normies.

I suppose all of this was very smart on the part of the Biden administration. The next attorney general has a lot of work to do; Garland said that bringing the Capitol insurrectionists to justice was his number-one priority. Putting forward an unobjectionable white man is a good way to fill this important post quickly and get to the business of restoring the Justice Department after its reputation and mission have been degraded by Sessions and Barr.

But I wish Biden had just nominated a woman of color who would put the fear of God into these Republicans. I wouldnt have minded an AG that was confirmed 51-50 with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie.

Promoting women of color cannot be done in a bipartisan fashion. Republicans will not allow it. When Democrats look for nominees that can be confirmed with strong bipartisan support, they are essentially excluding women of color simply because Republicans will vociferously object to any woman of color put forward. The solution is not to ignore those qualified candidates, but to ignore Republicans and get other Democrats to fall in line.

Picking your battles is an important part of governance. But the fact that Republicans force a battle over every woman of color who is nominated for anything is the precise definition I would have given for systemic racism in front of the Judiciary Committee.

More:
It Was Garlands Hearingbut Women of Color Were on Trial - The Nation

Garland vows at confirmation hearing to keep politics out of DOJ while drawing bipartisan praise – kuna noticias y kuna radio

Merrick Garland, President Joe Bidens attorney general nominee, vowed Monday to keep politics out of the Justice Department and to fully prosecute the heinous crimes committed in the attack on the US Capitol in the deadly riot on January 6.

Garland was praised by Republicans and Democrats alike in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, where he faced questions about the politically charged investigations that await him if confirmed to lead the Justice Department, including a federal probe into Bidens son Hunter Biden and whether the DOJ should wade into former President Donald Trumps role in the riot.

Garland, who led the Justice Department investigation into the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, said that the current threat from White supremacists now is a more dangerous period than we faced at that time, vowing to make his first priority to ensure investigators have all the resources they need to investigate the attack on the Capitol. He also pledged to redouble the Justice Departments efforts to fight discrimination in law enforcement and provide equal justice amid heated policy debates over race and the criminal justice system.

If confirmed, I will supervise the prosecution of White supremacists and others who stormed the Capitol on January 6 a heinous attack that sought to disrupt a cornerstone of our democracy: the peaceful transfer of power to a newly elected government, Garland said Monday.

The hearing was often a lightning round through the myriad issues under the purview of the Justice Department and federal investigators, moving from questions about consent decrees and policing to immigration and border security to DOJs antitrust lawsuit against Google. Garland repeatedly said he would not be influenced by political considerations, with Republicans lamenting a politicized DOJ during the Obama administration and Democrats charging the department was used as a political weapon in the Trump administration.

I dont care who pressures me in any direction, Garland said. The Department, if I am confirmed, will be under my protection for the purpose of preventing any kind of partisan or other improper motive in making any kind of investigation or prosecution. Thats my vow. Thats the only reason Im willing to do this job.

While Garland declined to weigh in on some of the controversies of the Trump administration, he strongly rebuked the Trump administrations child separation immigration policy, calling it shameful and committing to aiding a Senate investigation into the matter.

I think that the policy was shameful. I cant imagine anything worse than tearing parents from their children, and we will provide all of the cooperation that we possibility can, Garland told Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin of Illinois.

The attorney general nominee also stressed that the Justice Departments role is meant to serve the Rule of Law and to ensure equal justice under the law, noting that last year was the 150th anniversary of the Justice Departments founding in the aftermath of the Civil War, and that its core mission was to secure the civil rights promised by the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments.

The mission remains urgent because we do not yet have equal justice, Garland said. Communities of color and other minorities still face discrimination in housing, education, employment, and the criminal justice system.

Garland is testifying Monday before the Judiciary Committee five years after he became the poster child for the Republican blockade of an open Supreme Court seat in the final year of President Barack Obamas term when Senate Republicans denied even a hearing for Garland as Obamas Supreme Court nominee.

After Trump won the White House in 2016 and selected a new Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, Garland returned to his position as the chief judge of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. While he stepped down from that position a year ago, he remains on the appellate court and has served on the federal bench for more than two decades.

Hell be leaving that appointment to take over a department often at the center of the political crises of the Trump administration.

While Republicans blocked Garlands Supreme Court nomination, his selection at attorney general was lauded by both Democrats and Republicans on Monday, and he is expected to be easily confirmed.

Garlands hearing will continue for a second day on Tuesday, with outside witnesses testifying before the Judiciary Committee. Durbin told CNN on Monday that he expected Garlands nomination would be approved by his panel next Monday, and he expects the full Senate will confirm Garland later that week. He said Republicans have agreed not to delay next Mondays committee vote, which they can do for one week under the rules.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the panels top Republican, used his opening statement to defend the 2016 decision he made as the committees chairman not to hold a hearing for Garland.

I took a position on hearings and I stuck to it, and thats it, Grassley said. I admire Judge Garlands public service.

After the hearing, Grassley told reporters he was inclined to support Garlands nomination. Right now it looks good but I dont want to make a final decision, Grassley said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said he would most likely support Garland. And Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said he expected to vote for Garland.

Thats my intention, Cornyn said. I think hes had an incredible career. And I think he seems like a fundamentally decent human being.

During the hearing, Republicans pressed Garland on whether he would allow the investigations into both Hunter Biden and the FBIs handling of the 2016 Russia investigation to continue unimpeded, as well as questions on policy fights theyre likely to have with the Biden administration.

Grassley asked Garland whether he had spoken to Biden about his sons case, where federal investigators in Delaware have been examining multiple financial issues involving the younger Biden, including whether he violated tax and money laundering laws in business dealings in foreign countries, principally China, two people briefed on the probe told CNN in December.

I have not, Garland responded. The President made abundantly clear in every public statement before and after my nomination that decisions about investigations and prosecutions will be left to the Justice Department. That was the reason that I was willing to take on this job.

Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, asked him about whether he would be Bidens wing man, in a dig at former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder.

I am not the Presidents lawyer, Garland responded. I am the United States lawyer.

Multiple Republicans asked Garland about the problems with the FBIs Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants in the Russia investigation, which were documented by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz. And they urged Garland to allow John Durham, whom former Attorney General William Barr made a special counsel last year as he investigated the FBIs handling of the Russia case, to complete that investigation, just as Barr allowed former special counsel Robert Mueller to do.

Garland said he needed to speak with Durham about the probe before he could make any commitments, but added, I dont have any reason to think he should not remain in place.

Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican considered a possible 2024 presidential candidate, asked Garland whether he supported defunding the police. Garland responded by saying neither he nor Biden support that, while noting, We saw how difficult the lives of police officers were in the bodycam videos we saw when they were defending the Capitol.

Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, another potential 2024 GOP candidate, got into a lengthy discussion with Garland over the federal death penalty, asking if he regretted supporting the death penalty for Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing case.

Garland responded he did not have any regret for supporting the death penalty in that case, but he has developed concerns in the two decades since, including over exonerations, the arbitrary way its applied and the impact its had on communities of color.

Democrats have charged that the Trump administration damaged the Justice Departments credibility, from its handling of cases involving Trumps friends and aides to the former Presidents use of his pardon power and they were hopeful Garland would restore it.

The publics faith in the Department of Justice has been shaken the result of four years of Departmental leadership consumed with advancing the personal and political interests of one man Donald Trump, Durbin said in his opening statement. Judge Garland, we are confident that you can rebuild the Departments once hallowed halls. That you can restore the faith of the American people in the rule of law. And that you can deliver equal justice for all.

Democrats largely didnt mention Trump by name when asking about the investigation into the January 6 riot, but they touched on the question of whether the Justice Department should examine the former Presidents role, which led to his impeachment. Even Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell, after voting to acquit Trump in the Senate trial, suggested that the criminal justice system is the right venue in which to consider those allegations.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, encouraged Garland to look upstream, asking whether it was a fair question for the investigation to not rule out investigation of funders, organizers, ringleaders or aiders and abettors who were not present in the Capitol on January 6.

Fair question, Garland responded. We will pursue these leads wherever they take us.

Later, Sen. Alex Padilla, a California Democrat, raised Trumps role in inciting the January 6 riot, but didnt ask Garland about whether Trump should be investigated.

Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, and several other Democrats asked Garland how the Justice Department can address the disparate treatment Black Americans receive in the justice system and problems with police discrimination.

Garland pointed specifically to mass incarceration as one issue that should be tackled. We can focus our attention on violent crimes and other crimes that put great danger in our society, and not allocate our resources to something like marijuana possession, Garland said.

Durbin raised what he said was a mistake that both he and Biden made two decades ago backing legislation that implemented disproportionate sentences for crack cocaine compared to powder cocaine. Garland said it was an issue he planned to examine further.

At the end of his exchange with Booker, Garland fought back tears after Booker asked him about his motivations for taking on the role and his own family history confronting hate and discrimination.

I come from a family where my grandparents fled anti-Semitism and persecution, Garland said. I feel an obligation to the country to pay back for protecting us.

This story and headline have been updated with additional developments Monday.

Link:
Garland vows at confirmation hearing to keep politics out of DOJ while drawing bipartisan praise - kuna noticias y kuna radio

Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Election Shows the Danger of Partisan… – Truthout

The U.S. House of Representatives voted recently to remove newly elected Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia from congressional committees for endorsing violence against Democratic politicians, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and for spreading harmful and hateful disinformation, from the QAnon conspiracy theory that portrays Democrats as cannibalistic pedophiles, to the lie that school shootings have been staged, to various anti-Semitic tropes.

One of the last straws before the House acted was video that recently came to light showing Greene in Washington, D.C., on two separate occasions stalking and harassing gun-regulation advocate David Hogg, a survivor of the 2018 school massacre in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 people dead.

Coming in the wake of Januarys attack on the U.S. Capitol by a far-right mob incited by former President Trump and other Republican politicians, the Houses dramatic move to de-committee Greene marks the first time in modern history that the majority party has taken such action against a member of the minority. More typically, the offending members party internally handles such matters, which typically involve criminal charges. But while the Republican House leadership removed Rep. Steve King of Iowa from committees in 2019 for making a racist remark to a publication, it declined to take action on Greene.

Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.

Before the Feb. 4 House vote to remove her, in which Democrats were joined by 11 Republicans, Greene gave an emotional speech on the chamber floor in which she did not apologize for her remarks but noted they were made before her election and called them words of the past. She also invoked her Christian faith, complained that she was allowed to believe things that werent true and attacked the mainstream media, national debt, open borders, cancel culture, big tech, transgender identity, Black Lives Matter protests, and abortion which she called the worst thing this country has ever committed.

Though Greene has been disempowered when it comes to passing legislation, she remains the elected representative for Georgias 14th Congressional District, where shes a polarizing figure. She has pledged to use her platform and newfound free time to push the Republican Party further to the right. Shes successfully used the controversy over her committee removal to raise small-donor funds for her campaign, raking in $325,000 in the two days before the vote, according to OpenSecrets.org.

With Greene a rising celebrity on the far right, a question confronting U.S. democracy movements is how to prevent such violence-endorsing extremists from getting elected to Congress in the first place. That will take reforms to end the extreme partisan gerrymandering that helped make Greenes election possible, and which voting rights experts say is at risk of being repeated this year in a handful of Southern states, including Georgia.

Encompassing the southernmost reaches of the Appalachian mountains, the outer northern edge of the Atlanta metro area, and some of the Chattanooga metro area, Georgias 14th Congressional District came into being after the 2010 census, which found that the states population had grown 18% over the previous decade, giving it an additional U.S. House seat. States approach redistricting differently, and Georgia is among those where the legislature draws maps that the governor can veto.

Historically, the legislature handled the technical details of the map-drawing process through a contract with the University of Georgias nonpartisan Carl Vinson Institute of Government. But in 2011, the Republican-controlled state legislature decided unilaterally to take a different approach.

At the time, REDMAP was well underway; thats the Republican State Leadership Committee initiative that at the time targeted legislative races in key swing states like North Carolina with an eye toward redistricting control after 2010. After helping Republicans win and extend control in legislatures, the project used advanced map-drawing technology to create districts favorable to the GOP. Georgia, having been governed by a Republican trifecta controlling the House, Senate, and governors office since 2005, didnt need help from REDMAP but legislative Republicans there still took steps to further consolidate their partys control of the map-drawing process.

In February 2011, Georgias GOP legislative leaders announced the creation of a Legislative and Congressional Reapportionment Office. It employed many of the same people who worked on redistricting at the Carl Vinson Institute. Its adviser was Anne W. Lewis, a partner in the firm Strickland Brockington Lewis; at the time, she served as general counsel to the Georgia Republican Party. The GOP leadership claimed basing the work at the Capitol was cheaper.

Democrats in the legislature criticized the change. Stacey Abrams, who at the time served as the House minority leader and represented Atlanta and unincorporated DeKalb County, said that they did not include Democrats in this decision raises some serious questions about transparency and accountability. Senate Democratic Leader Robert Brown called the news very much a surprise and said the office is obviously not nonpartisan.

When Democratic legislative leaders asked for a separate reapportionment office to provide them with the needed legal and other support services to play a meaningful role in the map-drawing process, the Republicans turned them down. They said the new office would serve all members of the General Assembly.

As of 2010, after Georgia held elections based on the old map from 2001, Republicans controlled seven of the states 13 congressional seats. Of its six Democratic districts, three were in the Atlanta area and considered safe for Democrats even under the new 2011 map. But two other districts held by Democrats John Barrows and Sanford Bishops were seen as likely targets for Georgia Republicans looking to expand power as they gained full control of redistricting for the first time.

As it turned out, the GOPs 2011 maps displaced Barrow, whos white, from a crossover district where multiracial coalitions were able to elect candidates of their choice, and redrew him into one thats now solidly Republican. The map also made the district held by Bishop, whos Black, majority-minority a gerrymandering practice known as packing, when a partys voting power is concentrated in one district to reduce its power in others. And it put part of strongly Democratic Atlanta in Republican Rep. Phil Gingreys 11th District a gerrymandering practice known as cracking, when the voting power of a partys supporters is diluted across districts.

The GOP mapmakers placed Georgias new 14th Congressional District in the states northwestern corner and they drew the lines in a way that didnt reflect the states growing demographic diversity. In 2000, Georgia was already among the 10 states with the highest concentration of nonwhite residents at 37%. By the 2010 census, the nonwhite portion of the states population had grown to 44%, with the Hispanic population accounting for almost a quarter of the states population growth and thats with an undercount of people of color in Southern states including Georgia. Georgias 14th, on the other hand, was drawn by Republicans to be 85% white, 12% Latino, and 8.7% Black. The district is also wealthier and older than Georgia as a whole, with a 2017 poverty rate of 14.7% compared to the state rate of 16%, and a resident median age of 38 compared to the state median of 36.8. Political observers predicted the changes would lead to more Republicans in the states congressional delegation.

U.S. Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, the civil rights leader who died last year, called the map an affront to the spirit and the letter of the Voting Rights Act. The states League of Women Voters, which has taken a lead role in fighting gerrymandering, accused GOP lawmakers of disregarding public input given at the dozen hearings held across the state.

In August 2011, after making minor changes that didnt affect the 14th, the Georgia House and Senate approved the congressional map in party-line votes and Gov. Nathan Deal (R) signed it into law. That October, the state submitted the map to the U.S. Department of Justice for preclearance as then required under the Voting Rights Act for states and local jurisdictions with a history of voting discrimination. At the same time, Georgia filed a federal lawsuit challenging the preclearance requirement, arguing its based on a racial climate that no longer exists in the state an assertion Abrams challenged, saying, Georgia continues to evidence examples of that, not the least of which we believe are the current maps they are submitting, which re-segregate the state of Georgia, polarize communities of color and isolate them into enclaves.

Questioning the states ability to draw fair political districts while it was also challenging the rules for creating them, the Georgia Legislative Black Caucus and other groups asked the federal courts to reject the maps. Im concerned about minority votes. Im concerned about dilution of votes. Im concerned about coalition districts. Im concerned about all of those things from this power grab by those in power today, Democratic State Sen. Emanuel Jones, the head of the Black Caucus, said at the time.

But on Dec. 23, 2011, the Obama DOJ under Attorney General Eric Holder approved the maps under the Voting Rights Act. It was the first time in Georgia history that all of the states maps, for state House and Senate as well as Congress, were approved on first review. Another challenge to the preclearance requirement filed in federal court that same year, from Alabama, would eventually end up at U.S. Supreme Court, whose 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision effectively ended preclearance including review of Republican-drawn voting maps.

Following the 2012 elections based on Georgias newly drawn maps, the Republican Party as predicted gained a seat in the states congressional delegation, giving the GOP an 8-6 edge. Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Graves, who had been drawn into the states new 14th Congressional District from his former seat in the 9th, faced no primary opponent and went on to crush Democratic challenger Daniel Grant in the general election by 72-27.

Every election since then in Georgias 14th has been at least that lopsided. In 2014, after defeating a primary challenger with over 74% of the vote, Graves went on to win without any opposition in the general election. In 2016, the same year the Trump would carry the district by 53 points, Graves defeated two primary challengers with over 75% of the vote and then routed a write-in candidate in the general. Graves attracted two primary challengers in 2018, but both quit the race before Election Day. That November, Graves went on to defeat a Democrat who during the race was convicted of driving under the influence and sentenced to six months in prison. Graves captured over 76% of the vote that cycle. The Cook Political Reports Partisan Voter Index rates the 14th as R+27, meaning its far more Republican than the national average.

But theres statistical evidence that the outcomes of elections in the 14th and Georgias congressional districts overall dont honestly reflect the electorates preferences. A 2017 report titled Extreme Maps by the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan law and policy institute, examined data from the 2012, 2014, and 2016 election cycles to identify states where the manipulation of district lines gave the map-drawing party a share of seats grossly at odds with statewide election results. The report found that the decades congressional maps were biased in favor of Republicans nationwide, with North Carolina, Michigan, and Pennsylvania showing the most extreme levels of partisan bias, followed by Florida, Ohio, Texas, and Virginia. It also found that Georgia, along with Tennessee and Wisconsin, showed statistically significant GOP skews during that period. In fact, Georgias gerrymandered congressional races had become so uncompetitive that the San Francisco-based political startup Crowdpac used the state as its poster child for the detrimental effects of hyper-partisan redistricting by launching a national campaign there in 2017 urging citizens to consider challenging their local congressperson using the companys crowdfunding website.

In December 2019, Graves announced that he would not run for Congress again, and he stepped down early the following October. His retirement led to a crush of candidates entering the 2020 Republican primary for the 14th District seat nine in all who qualified for the ballot. The top two finishers in the June primary were Greene, a commercial construction firm owner with a business degree from the University of Georgia, who won the most votes at 43,892 (40.3%), and neurosurgeon John Cowan, who got 22,862 votes (21%). Both describe themselves as pro-Trump Republicans, but Cowan does not share Greenes extreme views and embrace of conspiracy theories.

Cowan grew up on a cattle farm in Northwest Georgia, but Greene is not a longtime resident of the district. When she first considered a congressional run, she was living north of Atlanta in Alpharetta the 6th District, where she planned to challenge U.S. Rep. Karen Handel in the GOP primary. But supporters of Greene including members of the secretive, far-right House Freedom Caucus, whose 48 known members include 27 representing Southern states reportedly convinced her to relocate to Georgias 14th and run for the open seat. The Caucuss House Freedom Fund also supported her campaign, which was primarily self-funded.

Though Cowan whose slogan was all the conservative, none of the embarrassment won hundreds of endorsements from leaders in the 14th District and support from organizations that dont generally get involved in primary races, he lost by 57-43 in a year when the GOPs conservative base was fired up by angry rhetoric from President Trump and other extremist leaders about pandemic restrictions and Black Lives Matter protests. Cowan recently told Fox 5 Atlanta that Greenes great endorsements from U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows, the former North Carolina congressman who went on to serve as Trumps chief of staff, carried a lot of weight. Both are former House Freedom Caucus leaders. Trump hailed Greenes primary win in a tweet, calling her a future Republican Star whos strong on everything.

On the Democratic side, the 2020 primarys unchallenged winner was Kevin Van Ausdal, an IT specialist and political novice who said he wanted to bring civility back to Washington. At one point during the campaign, rattled by Greenes violent rhetoric and support from white supremacists and other extremists, Van Ausdal reportedly texted to his wife that he was breaking down; soon after, she asked for a divorce, and he had to move out. Within days Van Ausdal quit the race and returned to his home state of Indiana. By then, the window had closed for Democrats to find an alternative, as Georgia law says a candidate who withdraws fewer than 60 days before the election cannot be replaced on the ballot. That November, Van Ausdal still received a quarter of the vote despite having quit, and Greene was on her way to Washington.

In the round of redistricting set to get underway later this year, an unprecedented number of states nationwide will be drawing maps under new rules designed to reduce the potential for extreme partisan gerrymandering. Among them is Virginia, whose voters this past November approved a constitutional amendment creating a bipartisan redistricting commission in order to avoid hyper-partisan gerrymandering of the states legislative and congressional districts. To date, four states have adopted such bipartisan politician-appointed commissions for drawing political maps, while 11 other states have adopted independent redistricting commissions. Virginia, currently controlled by a Democratic trifecta, is the only Southern state so far to move in this direction.

But a report released this week by the Brennan Center finds that Georgia and three other Southern states Florida, North Carolina, and Texas remain at very high risk for extreme partisan gerrymandering due to whos drawing the maps, shifts in the legal landscape, and rapid demographic change thats threatening the political status quo. Three other states Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina are at high risk.

In Georgia, using the courts to challenge gerrymandering has long been complicated by the state constitution, which offers few specifics about voting rights or the characteristics of voting districts, and more recently by the U.S. Supreme Courts 2019 ruling in the North Carolina case Common Cause v. Rucho, which held that partisan gerrymandering is a political question the courts cant answer. Fair district advocates havent had much luck in Georgias Republican-controlled legislature, either. Last year, for example, a group of Democratic state senators introduced a resolution proposing to amend Georgias constitution to create an independent redistricting commission; the measure was referred to the Reapportionment and Redistricting Committee, where the GOP leadership did not allow it to budge. The resolution, known as the Democracy Act, has been introduced again this year; it would also create an online portal to help citizens submit ideas for the maps. Its being promoted by pro-democracy groups including Common Cause and the ACLU.

We commend resolution sponsors for making strides to reform Georgias redistricting process, said Gigi Pedraza, executive director of Latino Community Fund Georgia, part of the Georgia Redistricting Alliance thats advocating for fairness and transparency in the map-drawing process. Much work lies ahead to have meaningful and transformative changes that will ensure our communities are truly represented.

Because gerrymandering creates noncompetitive districts, many of the Georgia legislators who will be drawing the new maps got their positions without facing competition from the other major party. In 2016, Georgias legislative races were deemed the least competitive nationwide, with 81% of legislative seats going uncontested as a result of partisan gerrymandering. In 2018, even with those same maps in place, Georgia Democrats and allied groups undertook a massive organizing effort and managed to flip 13 state House seats. To capture the state House in 2020 they needed to win another 16 seats but managed to flip only two despite the efforts of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee led by former Attorney General Eric Holder, which targeted Georgia and 13 other states with the goal of depriving Republicans of their trifectas. And it wasnt just Georgia where Democrats hopes of gains ahead of redistricting were dashed: A post-election analysis by Facing South found that, despite Democrats taking the presidency and U.S. Senate, the GOP gained at least 48 seats in Southern legislatures in 2020 and held majorities in all of the regions legislative chambers outside of Virginia. In Georgia, Republicans now control the state House by 103-76 and the Senate by 34-22.

The new round of redistricting is set to begin later this year after the federal government sends the 2020 census data to the states. While the Census Bureau initially intended to make the information available by April 1, its now saying the data may not be released before July 31 due to delays related to the pandemic and other disasters. In Georgia, a partnership created last year between the anti-gerrymandering group Fair Districts Georgia and the Princeton Gerrymandering Project will provide analysis and information in hopes of helping the states lawmakers draw fairer districts.

Georgia is not among the states expected to gain a congressional seat this year, so the legislature will not have to draw a new district. However, an idea has been floated that puts forth congressional redistricting as a solution to the problems Greene presents. Henry Olsen, a Washington Post columnist and a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, has suggested the Georgia GOP gerrymander her out of the seat. Hes calling for lawmakers to break up the 14th and put parts of it in new districts where other GOP incumbents have represented more of the voters, thus giving them an edge in a primary race against Greene.

This approach contains a fair bit of risk, Olsen noted, but its likely to be less risky than any other option.

Here is the original post:
Marjorie Taylor Greene's Election Shows the Danger of Partisan... - Truthout

Merrick Garland backed by 4 former attorneys general, including 2 Republicans, ahead of confirmation hearing – USA TODAY

Merrick Garland, Biden's attorney general pick, has a long history with the Justice Department. Here are three things to know about Judge Garland. USA TODAY

Two Republican attorneys general were among bipartisan groups of U.S. Justice Department alums and formerfederal judges who announced their support Friday for President Joe Biden's attorney general nominee Merrick Garland.

Michael Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales, who both served as attorneys general in the George W. Bush administration, were among more than 150 former Justice officials and U.S. attorneys who lauded the federal appeals court judge as "the rightperson" for a difficult job following the tumult of the Trump administration.

Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, who led the Justice Department during the Obama administration, also were among the signatories to a letter submitted to the leadership of the Senate Judiciary Committee leadership where Garland is set for a Monday confirmation hearing.

DOJ: The Justice Department urgently needs a reset. Enter Merrick Garland. Is he up for it?

More: Biden introduces Merrick Garland, 3 other Justice Department nominees

Then-President George W. Bush embraces U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as he walks offstage after the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in April 2005 in Washington, D.C. Gonzales has "fond feelings" about his service.(Photo: Joe Raedle, Getty Images)

A separate endorsement was submitted on behalf of 61 former federal judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents.

"Judge Garland approaches thelaw with an unwavering commitment to fairness and justice," the judges said. "Those of us who haveworked directly with Judge Garland have seen firsthand his strong moral compassand abiding integrity."

The selection of Garland, who also served as a top Justice official in the Clinton administration, has been cast by Biden as an attempt to reset a Justice Department roiled by politics and efforts by former President Donald Trump to use the institution to advance his political interests.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

"The work and reputation of the Department of Justice are as important as they have ever been," the former Justice officials said. "Judge Garland is the right person to ensure the fair administration of justice, whether related tonational security, public integrity, civil rights, antitrust, crime, or other pressing issues.

"He is alsothe right person to do so with integrity, humility, and a complete understanding of the substantialresponsibility on his shoulders at this time," the former Justice officials said.

Garland approaches his Monday confirmation hearing five years after a Republican-controlled Senate blocked his nomination to the Supreme Court by then-President Barack Obama.

But he might not be good for business

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/19/merrick-garland-nomination-backed-2-bush-attorneys-general/4513774001/

Go here to read the rest:
Merrick Garland backed by 4 former attorneys general, including 2 Republicans, ahead of confirmation hearing - USA TODAY