http://www.nationalreview.com/node/394116/print
What’s Really Going on with Holder’s Civil-Rights Crusade against Police
Departments

Civil-rights investigations in Ferguson and Staten Island? No, what
denizens of St. Louis and New York City ought to be worried about right now
is . . . the crime wave overtaking Seattle.

If you don’t understand why, then you probably thought Obamacare was about
covering the uninsured. Like its health-care “reform” campaign, the Obama
Left’s civil-rights crusade is about *control* — central control of state
law enforcement by Washington.

The deaths of Michael Brown in Missouri and Eric Garner in New York are
each tragic in their own way. But in neither is there a federal
civil-rights case to be had. To think otherwise, you have to be getting
your advice from Al Sharpton — the huckster confidant of President Obama
and Attorney General Holder.

The law of civil rights requires the government to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant, usually driven by racial prejudice,
willfully acted — violently in these cases — with the evil purpose to
deprive a person of specific federal rights. Let’s put aside the utter
absence of proof that race had any bearing on what happened in Staten
Island, for example, where police supervised by an African-American officer
came to the scene because of complaints about Garner by local business
owners. It is virtually impossible to prove a civil-rights violation when
there is no denying that police were engaged in a good-faith arrest and
were put in the position of using force because a suspect resisted.

In Ferguson, Michael Brown did not merely resist arrest. Having just robbed
a store, he was the aggressor in a confrontation with a police officer, who
was made to fear for his life. And in Staten Island, there may be a real
question
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/393933/staten-island-decision-andrew-c-mccarthy>
about whether one police officer used excessive force under the
circumstances; but there is no question that some quantum of force was
appropriate in arresting a physically imposing suspect who insisted he
would not be taken into custody and waved his arms to prevent the cops from
cuffing him.

Federal civil-rights cases are much harder to make than state homicide
cases. They are supposed to be. They were conceived as a rare federal
intrusion on the sovereign police power a state exercises within its
territory. When police are engaged in an arrest because a crime really has
been committed, and they use force because the suspect really does resist,
the claim that they were actually scheming to deprive the suspect of his
civil rights is asinine. The time to worry about the deprivation of civil
rights, as Messrs. Williamson
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/393990/restraining-and-restraint-kevin-d-williamson>,
Cooke
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/393999/want-limit-use-police-force-limit-state-charles-c-w-cooke>,
and Goldberg
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/394012/rand-paul-right-about-eric-garner-jonah-goldberg>
point out, is when progressives enact overbearing laws that criminalize
things like untaxed cigarette sales, not when police dutifully carry them
out.

Eric Holder knows this as well as anyone. The bloviating he is doing today
about Ferguson and Staten Island is of a piece with the bloviating he was
doing two years ago about Sanford, Fla. As I observed
<http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353396/holder-revives-bogus-civil-rights-investigation-against-zimmerman-andrew-c-mccarthy>
of the Trayvon Martin killing at the time
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/353970/obama-administrations-race-baiting-campaign-andrew-c-mccarthy>,
the attorney general huffed and puffed about bringing a civil-rights case
against “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman, but he was never actually going
to file one
<http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353455/politicized-justice-department-zimmerman-civil-rights-case-cia-interrogators-case-all>.
It would have been even more embarrassing than the trumped-up murder case he
and Sharpton
<http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/296005/holder-meets-sharpton-andrew-c-mccarthy>
browbeat Florida into charging — the one the jury threw out in nothing flat.

Holder and his constitutional-scholar boss are not banging the civil-rights
drum because they believe these are prosecutable cases. It is just a
pretext for unleashing Justice Department community organizers on state and
municipal police departments.

The government cannot win a standalone loser of a civil-rights prosecution
by crying, “Disparate impact!” Individual cases that have been demagogued
by the racial-grievance industry become high profile. Once public attention
is riveted, the legal and logical flaws become obvious. When people start
looking long and hard, the “institutionalized racism” canard is exposed.
For guys like Sharpton, that’s bad for business.

But the Justice Department civil-rights *investigations* Holder is fond of
announcing are not like public trials. They occur out of the public eye,
where feverish Justice Department claims are not aired and scrutinized.
More significant, they happen with the air of extortion created by the
nearly $28 billion in funding Congress keeps giving Justice every year, no
matter how many congressional investigations it obstructs, how many false
statements its officials make, and how much it politicizes law enforcement.
The investigations are taxpayer-funded jihads that states, cities, and
towns know they lack the resources to fight off.

Here is how the game works. Holder streams in behind a tragedy that
Sharpton and Obama have demagogued. He announces a civil-rights
investigation. Eventually, he backs down from the threat of an indictment
in the individual case, never conceding that the supporting evidence was
not there, usually citing some strawman injustice that has nothing to do
with the matter at hand — in Florida, for example, it was “stand your
ground” gun laws that purportedly needed reforming. But, the attorney
general is pleased to add, the original civil-rights probe of the non-crime
has metastasized into a thoroughgoing civil-rights probe of the state or
local police department’s training, practices,
and . . . drumroll . . . institutional racism.

You never get to see what that investigation turns up. States and their
subdivisions know they cannot afford to go toe-to-toe with the Beltway
behemoth. Big cities, moreover, are governed by Democrats sympathetic to
the Obama/Holder race obsessions — they’re happy to have the feds come in
and hamstring police with “social justice” guidelines that would be a hard
sell politically. So the Justice Department makes the locals an offer they
can’t refuse: A consent decree that makes the Treaty of Versailles look
like a slap on the wrist. This device is the license by which the Obama
administration is remaking state law enforcement in its own image.

How do they get away with this? Well, Obamacare may be the most notorious
“reform” progressives have foisted on an unsuspecting nation in modern
times, but it’s not the only one. In 1994 — the last time before 2009 that
Democrats controlled the White House and both congressional chambers — they
rammed through a monstrosity known as the “Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act.” A Clinton deputy attorney general named Eric Holder was
among the first to exploit it.

Consistent with the Left’s view of the states as cauldrons of racism, the
statute criminalizes <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/14141> “any
government authority” that “engage[s] in a pattern or practice of conduct
by law enforcement officers . . . that deprives persons of [federal]
rights, privileges, or immunities.” It is the civil-rights laws writ large
— imposed on whole cities rather than threatened against individual police
officers and citizens. And for good measure, the act encourages the
attorney general to file civil lawsuits in federal court to “obtain
appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the [offensive]
pattern or practice.”

Under this scheme, there are now more than 20 major American cities and
their police departments beholden to the Obama Justice Department. On
Thursday, in fact, Holder took time out from stirring the Staten Island pot
to pounce on Cleveland, which is still reeling from last month’s racially
charged case involving
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/12/02/cleveland-cop-said-he-had-no-choice-but-to-shoot-12-year-old-tamir-rice-father-says/>
the death of twelve-year-old Tamir Rice.

The boy was reportedly pointing a gun at people in a park, prompting an
emergency call to police, one of whom tragically shot him to death only to
find that the gun was a BB gun. Again, other than the happenstance that the
boy was black and the officer was white, race had no bearing on the case.
But that didn’t stop Holder from invoking the boy, along with Garner’s
death in Staten Island, in announcing that Justice’s investigation had
found a “pattern or practice” of excessive force used by Cleveland police.
As he spoke, he was flanked by Mayor Frank Jackson, the Democrat who
presided over this allegedly rogue police regime for the last decade — upon
inheriting it from Jane Campbell, the last mayor . . . a Democrat who,
you’ll be shocked to learn, moved on to Harvard’s Kennedy School to teach
how cities should be run. Mayor Jackson has, of course, agreed to the
installation of a “monitor,” who will see to it that Cleveland police
conduct themselves in an Obama-compliant manner.

Seattle is another of the big cities that has been snagged by the DOJ. It
has been under a consent decree since the Justice Department targeted
<http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/documents/spd_complaint_7-27-12.pdf>
it in 2012 for a “pattern or practice” of violations, allegedly including
“subjecting individuals to excessive force” — in particular, “using
excessive force against persons of color,” and “escalating situations and
using excessive force when arresting individuals for minor offenses.”

You may recall that the tide of rampant crime in New York City was turned
when, under Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the police began cracking down on minor
offenses — not untaxed cigarette sales but real violations that had nearly
destroyed the city’s quality of life. What ensued was a miraculous
transformation, with the Big Apple becoming the safest big city in America.

That policing model is under attack now — just as the NYPD’s
extraordinarily successful counterterrorism model has been undermined
<http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/276181/how-nypd-gets-jihad-right-andrew-c-mccarthy>
by Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. As Holder was making his
Cleveland splash, Bill de Blasio, New York City’s hard-left mayor,
opportunistically — and in the absence of any evidence — pointed to
Garner’s death as proof that “the way we go about policing has to
change. . . . People need to know that black lives and brown lives matter
as much as white lives.”

Holder announced that the Justice Department, which is already monitoring
the NYPD, will conduct a civil-rights investigation into Garner’s death.
Yes, that’s how it always starts.

Meanwhile, Seattle has been making announcements, too. It seems crime in
the Emerald City has been skyrocketing
<http://q13fox.com/2014/09/18/statistics-show-crime-on-the-rise-in-seattle/>
since the Justice Department came in to, er, help. Homicides up 21 percent,
car theft up 44 percent, aggravated assaults up 14 percent, and so on.

Welcome to Change: produced and directed by the Obama Justice Department
and coming soon to a town near you.

*— Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute.
His latest book is* Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for
Obama’s Impeachment
<http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=1594037760>.



__._,_.___
 ------------------------------
Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


 Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMWoyajZhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MTc5NjY0MDk->


 [image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMm5nOGgyBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQxNzk2NjQwOQ-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to