Below is my column on the resignation of Eric Holder as United States Attorney General. For civil libertarians, Holder’s tenure as Attorney General under President Obama has been one of the most damaging periods in our history with a comprehensive attack on various constitutional rights and principles from free speech to the free press to international law. In recent polling by NBC and the Wall Street Journal, Holder was the second most unpopular government official after the positively radioactive Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
As someone who previously called for Holder’s firing after the investigation of various journalists under national security powers, I am hardly one who can offer congratulatory sentiments for such a record. However, much like President Obama, one has to wonder what could have been if Holder had chosen a more principled and less political approach to his office. Holder is resigning the same week that a federal judge ordered the release of “Fast and Furious” documents after the Justice Department was accused of a pattern of delay and obstruction. Holder was previously held in contempt by Congress for his withholding documents and conflicting accounts to an oversight committee looking into the scandal. Indeed, Holder was looking at an even more aggressive period with the possible loss of the Senate and increased GOP seats in the House.
Ironically, Holder came into office trying to distinguish himself from such disastrous predecessors as Alberto Gonzales but proved no less political or blindly loyal to his own president. Indeed, both men fought aggressively to expand the powers of the presidency and national security laws over countervailing individual rights and separation of powers principles. It will be civil liberties and not civil rights that will be the lasting, and troubling, legacy of Eric Holder. The column is below:
The resignation of Eric Holder as attorney general is an unavoidably symbolic moment for an administration that itself appears to be waning in the final years of a troubled second term. Holder truly personifies an administration of unrivaled ambitions colliding with inescapable realities.
He proved a fierce friend to President Obama, and that loyalty might have worked to the disadvantage of both men. After a series of major court defeats and public controversies, Obama (like President Bush before him) might have been served better by an attorney general who was more detached from him and more attached to the constitutional principles that shape both their offices.
Holder has secured a well-earned position for himself in history as the nation’s first black U.S. attorney general. He is by any means an American success story. The son of a father born in Barbados and raised in New York, Holder used his considerable intellect to go to Columbia University for both college and law school. He was made a judge on the local D.C. court by President Reagan and was appointed U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia by President Clinton, who later made him deputy attorney general.
Holder’s life should be both an inspiration and a cautionary tale for young lawyers. As he ascended into power, Holder became increasingly viewed by critics as a bit too ambitious and political within the Justice Department. That reputation was reaffirmed for many with Clinton’s last-minute pardon of fugitive and major Democratic donor Marc Rich. By any objective measure, Rich was one of the least deserving pardon applicants in history — with 65 criminal counts, from tax evasion to wire fraud to racketeering to illegal trades with Iran. While his companies later pleaded guilty to 35 criminal counts, Rich fled to live the good life in Switzerland. Besides a long list of alleged felonies, Rich had a long list of friends close to Clinton … and Clinton in turn had Eric Holder.
Holder was accused of short-cutting the normal procedures to push through the pardon for Rich. Though he said he was “neutral” on the pardon (which itself is a bit shocking), former FBI director Louis Freeh said the Clinton White House had “used” Holder to keep the FBI and the DOJ from being heard on the pardon.
In his confirmation hearing, Holder promised not to have a repeatof the Rich scandal and not to allow politics to influence his decisions. It was a defining moment and one that Holder would have been wise to work to live up to.
But it did not take long for Holder’s inspiring “Mr. Smith comes to Washington” story to become “all the king’s men.” When the president was confronted with demands to investigate and prosecute individuals for torture under the Bush administration, Holder faced an early test of principle. He failed. The Justice Department blocked any prosecution despite our obligation under international treaties and the president’s (and Holder’s) acknowledgment that waterboarding is clearly a form of torture.
To quote Jerry Maguire, Obama had Holder at “hello” in seeking unbridled presidential authority. Many of the cases that Holder brought and policies that he supported resulted in startling defeats. He lost a series of criminal cases seeking massive reductions in privacy and due process protections for citizens. He unwisely pursued cases such as Canning, where a unanimous Supreme Court curtailed the powers of the president to make recess appointments.
Holder personally announced Obama’s “kill list” policy, in which the president claimed the right to kill any U.S. citizen on his sole authority without a charge, let alone a conviction. Holder’s department used the controversial Espionage Act of 1917 to bring twice the number of such prosecutions of all prior presidents under the Act. Journalists were placed under surveillance in a record that rivaled that of President Nixon. Holder led an appalling crackdown on whistle-blowers. Holder fought to justify massive warrantless surveillance and unchecked presidential authority to attack other countries without congressional approval.
Holder’s continual confrontations with Congress came to a head in a series of scandals, including the “Fast and Furious” controversy in which the government allowed drug gangs to get high-powered weapons in a truly moronic “gun walking” program. In that and other scandals, the administration withheld documents and key witnesses from oversight committees. Holder was wrong and was ultimately held in contempt of Congress.
While Holder can be credited with not shying away from our race conflicts, his actions such as intervening in the Zimmerman case (after the shooting of Trayvon Martin) and the recent Ferguson shooting were viewed by many as premature. His calling the United States a “nation of cowards” on race was a brave but also a divisive moment. In the end, however, his positive work in the area of civil rights will ultimately be eclipsed by his destructive legacy in the area of civil liberties and constitutional government.
The sad truth is that Holder could have been truly great — not simply as the first black attorney general but as a man of principle who stood with the law over politics and friendship. In one of the great lost opportunities in history, Holder will finish his tenure as he began it: a man with great but still unrealized potential.
Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, is a member of USA Today’s Board of Contributors.
392 thoughts on “The Holder Years and The Perils Of Politics Over Principle In Government”
Paul, you should see the requests I’ve been getting! But Ernst was the end of $$$ to candidates. Iowa has never had a woman as Senator. Her opponent apparently blew a debate, ergo 6% lead. But I like to think it was my contribution and will claim my part in her win.
Sandi – best of luck to you and your candidate. Money isn’t everything in politics. Well, maybe your money. 😉 I have been in Arizona since the early ’60s and I do not remember a woman running for Senate.
My husband and I are having a difference of opinion. I don’t think Obama can get any nominee through due to the lengthy process. My husband thinks Reid would ram it through with a simple majority. I think Leahy is committee chair of judiciary. I don’t think he would ruin his years of service with a Reid trick. It’s an agony knowing the Senate has to be Republican or this country is in hell for two years (we agree on that). Any thoughts?
I doubt Janet Napolitano will be confirmed by the Senate if nominated for attorney general.
If Napalitano takes the AG job, I will know she is crazy! As for our AG, take her, please!
Sandi – For the countries sake I hope Napolitano is locked into a long-term contract with the state of CA.
Paul, thank you.
I don’t know if Napolitano is locked, but why give up this state’s weather for two more years in DC – crazy!
I think the judge would have said something about the histrionics if he’d been awake. Maybe defense knew and didn’t want to embarass?
I know we Republicans are the scourge of the earth. However, I sent money to Ernst (Iowa) and the next day she was up 6 points!
Sandi – so there is a direct correlation between your sending candidates money and their polling numbers. You could be a secret weapon, or not quite secret now. 😉
Why is big money from Republicans bad and big money from Democrats (Soros, Stener) good?
Sandi – It just is and I don’t know why you don’t realize the whatever the Democrats do is good and the Republicans do is evil.
Annie, I did get a prescription for marijuana due to chronic pain, which I swear to you is true. So I got it and no relief. The rest sits in a cupboard. My Dr said just take a puff and if you feel nothing take another. I got up to 15 and gave up. Sad, I was looking forward to knowing what the fuss is all about. $150 in a cupboard.
I am a newcomer to this blog, but in defense of getting off subject, discussions tend to do that. We are only human.
paul C, My mother was 100% Irish and never used the word “pee”.
SWM – my mother used pee but not the other p word 🙂 My dad, who was German used that word.
Mules in horse harness.
Mammy, from Gone With The Wind
The Kennedy’s were as lace curtain as one can get. Rose Kennedy, the mayor’s daughter, was the epitome. Being “lace’ has more to do with money, education and style than morality.
SWM – my mother who was 100% Irish said the difference between the Lace and Shanty Irish was the Lace Irish peed in the sink in the house instead of peeing in the backyard.
Hey, I like fried bologna, too! Particularly for breakfast, with eggs. Anyway, my thoughts are racing from all the coffee, sooo here is a Haiku, since some people don’t seem to appreciate Irish Poems:
Physical Therapy 109???
A Haiku by Squeeky Fromm
Pools of blue water
Ripples from a sunken ship
Fiddle and Faddle
Squeeky, As wealthy as the Kennedy’s are, they’re still Shanty Irish. I know you’re waxing about the Clinton’s, but just because you have money doesn’t mean you’re not trash. Bubba will always have that fried bologna in his blood, even if he’s a vegan flying on private jets.
Nick – the Kennedys were Lace Irish, the only difference being they could afford curtains for their windows. 🙂
ROTFLMAO at what you said, I am going with the shock of Democratic royalty screwing around like rabbits and being involved in the death of Marilyn Monroe.
Whew! I shouldn’t drink coffee this late without some St. Brendan’s in it because I am all wound up! Anyway, here is another Irish Poem!
A Poor Excuse???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
Sooo, was the First Lady a whore???
Her husband, a horndog, and more???
But one can’t be brash
Calling them poor, white trash,
Because the fact is, they weren’t poor!
There are other brands of irish butter sold here too.
Paul, Actually quite a few stores carry kerrygold butter and cheese, and ,yes, it does come from Ireland.
SWM – I actually went to the fridge to check what the brand was by my wife is cleaning stuff in that area and it is not safe for me for awhile. 🙂
Comments are closed.