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.
Squeekers, I’m afraid you may be right.
on 1, September 26, 2014 at 2:58 pmPaul C. Schulte
Annie – I call my Congress people regularly, either at their Phoenix offices or Washington DC offices. I tell them how I feel about the legislation they are working on and I give the my personal report card. McCain has been fail for the last 12 years.
***************************
Paul, they probably just laugh at you, after you’ve hung up.
Annie – I will tell you when I told the woman at McCain’s office that I was NOT one of the people who thought he should run again, you could hear her jaw drop through the phone. 🙂
If nothing else it is therapeutic.
Paul, they probably just laugh at you, after you’ve hung up. said Annie.
I hope not because I call all the time to tell them how I feel about issues. Rarely I even get a personal response thru usually snail mail when they ask for my personal information. I know I may ignored when they don’t even bother to ask name or where I am from (to see if a constituent)
Obama responded to the petitions, calls, emails when he changed one part of the ACA, at this point forget which so cant google to find a click for it
I have seen senators and res also change their positions after the public spoke up.
To me part of the issue is people think as you wrote, ah il lbe ignored so why bother. If we don’t raise our voices and tell them what they think then we definitely deserve what we get.
(What I also notice on the thread, and not just this one, is that you and I fr instance, repeatedly say there are things we like that Obama has done but alos many that we don’t but somehow the we are disappointed/against gets ignored and instead we are painted with the brush you are Obama lovers and believe he walks on water.
As long as both sides, and more so the right, at least on this blog, refuses to acknowledge that one person can be both for someone’s policies and against some of them as well nothing will ever change.
http://cgcarwein.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/frogs-cartoon.jpg?w=584
Frogs arguing amongst themselves over trivial crap, while the pot warms up. As long as the oligarchs keep us arguing, the longer they keep getting to spend money on creating a brave new government.
@Annie
I pretty much agree with you. Our country is going to have to hit rock bottom before there are any changes. We will probably end up with an American Hitler or American Stalin.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Annie – I call my Congress people regularly, either at their Phoenix offices or Washington DC offices. I tell them how I feel about the legislation they are working on and I give the my personal report card. McCain has been fail for the last 12 years.
Correction @2:55, an important one, *that CANNOT be corrupted*
Olly, I have no answers. I look to those with the power, the ones with the voice, the ones with the audience who ALSO might be the ones with principles hat can be corrupted. Where are they? I’m feeling quite nihilistic today, I think in all reality we’re screwed and there is NO solution. I just get tired with the endless complaining AS IF we have any power to change anything. Who are we fooling?
I think that as long as the oligarchs have us fighting over who is a progressive and/or liberal and who is a conservative, or libertarian, or gilbertarian, they have us sufficiently distracted. How happy it must make them to see us dumb peons fighting each other daily. Professor Turley so often writes articles about what is wrong with government leaders, yet we never seem to get any ideas for how to change things. So many complainers, so few solutions. I’m just a retired older woman, powerless, probably in reality voiceless. BUT there are those with a louder voice, a bigger audience, more clout, why aren’t we hearing more than just what is wrong? Isn’t there a way forward? What good does endless complaining do?
Annie – what you are not understanding is that they fight themselves on the same levels that we fight here. And, frankly, unless they are sending people to track us, which they might, they could care.
“The New Black Panthers in front of a voting facility holding billy clubs were exonerated by Holder. That’s when we knew his goal, good blacks, bad whites.”
Precisely, Sally.
That was the point at which I lost any respect not only for Holder, but for the entire department, the so called Department of Justice, that he represented. The refusal to prosecute was blatantly racist biased and politically generated. Had the situation been reversed. Some white militia guys in cammo wielding clubs outside of a voting location, the hinges would have come off the left liberal establishment …..and you can bet your bippy that there would have been prosecutions. As it was…ho hum…some black panther guys interfering with the voting. Ho hum………….
Justice is ‘supposed’ to be blind. You would think that if Holder had felt discriminated against or disadvantaged that he would recognize that what HE is doing is exactly the same thing. His job was not to be a crusader for righting the wrongs experienced by Blacks in this country. His JOB was to be the administrator of the Department of Justice and uphold the laws in a professional, impartial manner.
He totally failed at his job. And we the people and our representatives have totally failed at holding him accountable.
The damage that Mr. Holder has done to the credibility of the Justice (so called) Department is incalculable and will be long lasting.
DBQ – that was the moment I knew which path Holder had taken, too. And I knew it was going to be a long four or eight years. Sadly, he has kept to the path, as has his master.
How does Citizens United allow the oligarchs to get away with the government they want?
The same way S J Res. 19 did NOT do anything about Citizens United. Nothing. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Get it yet? But all the caterwauling about it never told anyone that. I posted the final version here, 99% revised and key issues redacted, and no body noticed. Fail or pass, it made no difference. Pathetic.
That is how the DC combine rules today. Get used to it.
“How does Citizens United allow the oligarchs to get away with the government they want?”
Annie,
It’s your question; what’s your answer?
“The Holder Years and The Perils Of Politics Over Principle In Government”
Res Ipsa Loquitur
The Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights are not the Communist Manifesto.
The principles of the Manifesto, governmental control of the economy, redistribution of wealth and affirmative action, are opposite, antagonistic and unconstitutional. Liberals have nullified American individualism and freedom in favor of the fundamental principles of collectivism. The Congress is derelict in its ultimate duty to enforce the founding documents and the American thesis through available checks and balances, including impeachment.
The words of the Founders were written to stand.
The Founders allowed for minimal amendment, not nullification or “evolution.”
Ten were constitutional and sufficient.
James Madison –
“I doubt, if such a door was opened, if we should be very likely to stop at that point which would be safe to the government itself…”
AY,
Do you want “meaningful” dialog of the current progressive administration or the last one? When you unchain your government from the constitution then you have to take responsibility for EVERYTHING they do.
I voted for Bush; twice. I made completely uninformed choices and regret being a tool for progressivism. I was ignorant of the the proper role of government but have since learned and I’ve not made that same mistake again. At this point, to continue allowing this bureaucratic state to grow would be worse than willful ignorance.
Let’s all acknowledge that Washington DC is a club that we cannot belong to unless invited….and that requires bribery or other sucking up. Elections? Bah. Holder was one Reagan’s appointees to the federal bench and it goes on from there. That anyone expected him to be even handed is proof of how mesmerized we really are today.
Bye Eric…hope the rest of your life sucks. Good for you that you worry about one black kid here or there, but ignore the dozens killed by their own peers as if there’s nothing you could do about that. You are a punk. Glad to see you go.
Let’s talk about HOW governments are bought and sold. That’s IF people here really want a representative government, which I’m beginning to doubt. Just how much money does it take for principled men and women ( and there were some at some point in our history) to completely abandon their principles? Why do we think that the next President and his AG will be any different? Can we realistically expect a third party candidate to not ALSO be bought? How does Citizens United allow the oligarchs to get away with the government they want?
Annie – how much more real can I be. Would you like me to Skype the message to you. 😉
Annie, Annie you are being baited…. Be careful… There’s not going to be any meaningful dialogue directed at Obama or holder….. They can’t talk about there mistake and making this country almost 3rd world in standard of living…
Someone is CWI, again.
Paul, your ongoing mistake is thinking that Bush held any loftier principles than Obama and wasn’t also controlled by powerful sources, just like Obama.
We are now an Oligarchy, no longer what our Founders envisioned. We got the government the uber rich bought. Anyone who seriously thinks that any President that is ‘allowed’ to become President of the US will be any different is whistling in the dark. The puppeteers don’t give a damn about the American people unless they are in their socio economic group. We are the frogs in the pot who wasted our energies fighting one another and the chef was chuckling, whilst the water was boiling.
Annie – let us stick to your topic, Holder and Obama. Don’t conflate the issue. Don’t deflect. Both Holder and Obama lack principles.
Paul, let’s be real here, for ONCE.
“I think Holder and Obama both fell down when they veered from liberal progressive principles.”
Annie,
Are these the oaths they took?
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the liberal progressive principles of the United States.”
“I (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the liberal progressive principles of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
I don’t know, something about these oaths doesn’t seem quite right. Didn’t your daughter’s oath reference the constitution? What a conflict of interest to have the CinC and AG aligning with progressive principles while subordinates are supposed to march in a different direction. Is it any wonder the “rule of law” seems to blow with the wind?
I think Holder and Obama both fell down when they veered from liberal progressive principles. When they bought into the Military Industrial Complex, Wall Street elitism, and the Patriot Act. What truly great things this Administration could’ve accomplished if they had remained true to principle. Rightists should be relieved that Obama wasn’t the transformative President they feared he would be. As it turned out he was just another Bush with some very very powerful people pulling his strings. Holder decided to abandon his principles along with Obama. What a sad legacy, when one imagines what could’ve been. Having said that, no one is all bad and hopefully both Obama and Holder will be like Clinton and Bush and do some good things for humanity eventually.
Annie – your first mistake was thinking that either Obama or Holder held any principles.