Questionable Choices: Why Pushing Through the DOJ Nomination Will Alienate Rust Belt Democrats

The following was written by our friend John Bruhns. John is from Philadelphia where the whole controversy about Mumia Abu-Jamal and his murder of police officer Daniel Faulkner still stings the law enforcement community and the citizens who support them. John sends this to us, because it probably wouldn’t be received well at Huffington Post where he usually writes;

In case you missed it, last week Debo Adegbile was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee as a nominee to head up the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Not surprisingly, the vote came in along strict party lines, 10-8, Democrat versus Republicans. The gig looks like a slam dunk for the former NAACP Legal Defense Fund attorney. More than likely, if they don’t get the 60 votes in the Senate ordinarily needed to push through a vote without a filibuster, Senate Democrats will rule that a simple majority is enough, thus ensuring the confirmation of Mr. Adegbile. It would be a flamboyant exercise of the so-called “nuclear option.”

This is part of a new trend. After two terms of seeing his key appointments and legislation mired in partisan politics, President Obama has made it clear he supports this more aggressive approach, and separately announced plans to use more executive powers on other initiatives during the most recent State of the Union speech. While I disagree with the Senate invoking the “nuclear option” on political appointments and legislative initiatives, there are times when I can understand why any President along with members of the Senate would want to take more control to get things done and end partisan gridlock. However, if the Senate is going to take the drastic measure of using “nuclear option,” wouldn’t it be better for them to go nuclear on a better job candidate?

Mr. Adegbile may seem like a fine civil rights lawyer on paper, appearing to check every box for leading an office that enforces anti-discrimination laws, but it’s impossible to overlook the fact that he has made some questionable choices that disqualify him for such an important job and will result in some serious political fallout for Democrats, who have seriously underestimated the passionate opposition to this appointment by key a voting bloc.

Debo Adegbile took up the cause of Mumiu Abu-Jamal, decades after he was tried and convicted for gunning down a police officer on the streets of Philadelphia, and getting his death sentence commuted to life in prison on a technicality. Supporters of Mr. Adegbile, and Mr. Adegbile himself, have argued that he was simply exercising his duty as a defense lawyer, because in this country everyone has a right to due process, whether or not a lawyer likes the defendant. But this is a specious argument at best, because the murderer in question already had his day in court and his conviction was previously upheld on numerous appeals.

No one aware of the facts in this case (video link) has a shred of doubt that Mumia Abu-Jamal shot policeman Daniel Faulkner, at point blank range, including once in the face from 12-inches away. The young traffic cop, a married U.S. Army veteran, had been lured down a one-way street and was ambushed and killed by Abu-Jamal who was later overheard admitting to the murder. In addition, Abu-Jamal has never denied killing Daniel Faulkner.

Interestingly, Mr. Adegbile more recently has attempted to downplay his role in this case as if it somehow just happened to fall on his desk leaving him with no choice but to provide Abu-Jamal with representation. This effort to further distance himself from the case is also questionable. Why would a director of litigation for the NAACP give away hundreds of hours of his time and expertise on a case that was forced on him? That kind of commitment takes a passionate belief that you are somehow taking up a just cause. Otherwise, Adegbile could simply have quit, joined a top legal firm and gotten well paid for his time.

Look, I don’t profess to know why Mr. Adegbile wouldn’t choose to spend his time representing one of countless African-Americans on death row who may actually be innocent, instead of someone who is undeniably guilty. Maybe he regrets his decision, maybe not. Either way, he made a choice that puts him far out of the mainstream, and his later justifications before a Senate panel seem disingenuous at best.

Meanwhile, a good number of Democratic members of the Senate who vote in favor of this radical nomination may very well get slammed in the midterm elections. Many blue collar swing voters in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Jersey who are familiar with the facts of the most notorious police murder in the country tend to lean left. But they are also huge supporters of law enforcement, and the nation’s police see this nomination as an insult to the men and women who risk their lives every day to protect and serve the American people. A number of major law enforcement organizations representing more than one million police officers nationwide have sent protest letters to Washington over Adegbile’s nomination. Sadly, it appears as if the grievances of our nation’s law enforcement community over this particular nominee may have fallen on the deaf ears of most Senate Democrats.

At the very least, pushing through this nomination demonstrates the same level of questionable decision-making that led Mr. Adegbile to defend an unrepentant cop killer in the first place.

– John Bruhns

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden