logo.jpg (2272 bytes)

More news about Department of Justice racial quotas and preferences, AND Bill Lann Lee.

title.jpg (5417 bytes)

Site
Index:
Site Index / Menu.

Department of Justice
(DOJ) News
[ DOJ general/misc. ]         [ DOJ Bill Lann Lee ]          [ DOJ Racial Profiling ]

Back:
BACK:  Federal Agency News
Fed
Agency
News

DOJ - General / Misc. Articles

(DOJ):  DOJ Threatens to Create Racially Gerrymandered Voting Districts!  (08/22/99)
          SANTA PAULA, CA -- LA Times Headline:  "U.S. Probe Spotlights Small Town Ethnic Relations" -- "For the past year, the U.S. Department of Justice has been quietly investigating this city's electoral history after receiving a complaint that the system of at-large elections keeps Latinos off the City Council."  [Last time we checked, "at large election" means that all registered voters may vote for any candidate of their choice.  If the registered voters are indeed mostly Latino, why, then, haven't they voted their choices?  The DOJ probe blithely ignores this question.  Editor.]  

          "Nobody knows exactly what the government will do. But if it decides that minorities have been denied power in a city in which two-thirds of the 27,000 residents are Latino, it could sue to carve the 4.5 square miles into separate political districts."  That, of course, would be illegal according to Supreme Court rulings on the issue.

          "Although Latinos make up two-thirds of the population, they constitute considerably less than two-thirds of the U.S. citizens in the city.  Exactly what proportion are citizens is unknown."   According to the LA Times story, Ramon Rodriguez, a local Latino activist estimates that only 50% of the Latinos in Santa Paula are citizens of the U.S.  The Times quotes Mr. Rodriguez as saying that he doesn't think it matters. (!)

          "[T]he police chief and city clerk are Latino. The two local school boards are controlled by Latinos, who hold 3-2 majorities.  Some say these examples weaken the argument that Latinos lack political power in the city."

         "We're supposed to be one and the same," she [Connie Reed, a white businesswoman] said. "It shouldn't matter what race is in [office]. Something like this [DOJ probe] divides our town more than it's already divided."  (LA Times 08/22/99 by Margaret Talev)
[link http://www.latimes.com/excite/990822/t000074933.html ]

(DOJ):  'Diversity' Winning Against Equal Protection!  (05/25/99 - dead link)
          "If you dig no deeper than the headlines, you might suppose that race and gender preferences--known in the propaganda of liberalism as ``affirmative action'' and in common sense words as ``reverse discrimination''--are on the way out.

          "The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that such preferences for university admissions are unconstitutional. Voters in California and Washington state referendums voted overwhelmingly to end them in all state services, including college admissions, and other state referendums are pending. The liberal civil rights lobby warns luridly of ``the return of Jim Crow'' and its conservative opponents, ahem, crow that the ideal of ``a color-blind America'' is coming closer. And President Clinton vows to fight to the death for them.

          "...last week the civil rights office of the U.S. Justice Department issued guidelines that would support the Texas legislature's end-run around anti-discrimination law--and do much else besides. It ruled that if minority students perform less well on average in standardized test scores--as they do--then those tests cannot be used in determining college admissions in either public or private institutions.  (See Also:   Dept. of Education Declares SAT, ACT Racist!)

          "Overnight this ruling overturned national procedures for college admissions that were designed to produce results rewarding individual effort and ability regardless of race or gender. Even university administrators, who are almost invariably supporters of racial preferences, believe this ruling to be legally flawed. And it is plainly designed to circumvent court decisions and the decisions of voters that have overturned racial preferences--by making racially neutral and merit-based selection procedures illegal.

          "In short, we are witnessing a profound battle between two visions of America--one based on the idea of individual rights supported by a multi-ethnic majority of the American people, the other based on a permanent regime of racial preferences, a k a ``diversity,'' supported by the political class of politicians, bureaucrats and lawyers."  (Chicago Sun Times 05/25/99 by John O'Sullivan)
[former link **http://www.suntimes.com/output/osullivan/25osul.html]

(DOJ): Are sports teams with Indian names really a federal civil rights crime?  (02/19/99)
          WASHINGTON, DC -- "Warning: Naming your high school sports team the "Warriors" is now a federal crime.   That's what the Department of Justice seems to think: It's launched an investigation into whether a small North Carolina high school has violated the civil rights of its Native American students because its sports teams have Indian-themed names.

          "But the Libertarian Party says the investigation demonstrates how preposterous civil rights laws have become, and proves that Department of Justice bureaucrats are completely out of control.

          "Civil rights allegations have become a modern-day witch-hunt -- if saying so isn't a crime against our wiccan friends," said Steve Dasbach, the national director of the party. "What this case shows is that the Department of Justice has become a bigger threat to our civil liberties than any high school sports team is to our civil rights."

          "What put the Department of Justice on its current warpath?  The mother of one Native American student at Erwin High School in Asheville, North Carolina wrote to federal bureaucrats, complaining that her son was "deeply offended" because school teams were named the Warriors and the Squaws.

          "The Department of Justice jumped on the case, sending a detailed list of questions to the school administration about whether a "racially hostile environment" had been created for the 1% of students who are Native American.

          "Department of Justice lawyers demanded to know the history of the team names; the origin of its Indian mascot; the school's policies on racial discrimination; and the racial breakdown of all students, faculty, and administration. If the DOJ decides to prosecute, the school could lose $8 million in federal funds and spend as much as $500,000 in legal fees.

          "Interestingly, the "offended" student didn't allege that he had suffered any harm from the racially hostile environment -- he graduated in 1998 and is now employed.

          "No wonder Americans have an us-versus-them attitude about the federal government: They see a $15 billion federal agency, with armies of lawyers at its command, go after a high school in a case where even the so-called victim doesn't claim to be a victim," said Dasbach. "Apparently, hurt feelings are now a federal crime, and having a politically incorrect sports mascot is illegal behavior."  (Libertarian Party, contact George Getz, Press Secretary Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222 E-Mail: 76214.3676@Compuserve.com)
[link http://www.lp.org/rel/990219-names.html ]


DOJ - Bill Lann Lee Articles

Clinton defies GOP with Lee recess appointment (08/04/00)

          "President Clinton Thursday [Aug. 3, 2000] named Bill Lann Lee to head the Justice Department's civil rights division, ignoring warnings by Senate Republicans against a recess appointment of the controversial lawyer who failed to win Senate confirmation for the post.

          "The recess appointment, made while Congress is on its summer break and Republicans are nominating their 2000 presidential candidate in Philadelphia, allows Mr. Lee to serve through the remainder of Mr. Clinton's term despite his failure to win Senate confirmation.

          "Critics have called the appointment a flagrant violation of the Constitution, which gives the Senate the power to "advise and consent" on major executive appointments.

          "Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, said Mr. Clinton was playing partisan politics, adding that the timing of the appointment served as further evidence that he was "intent on dividing our people rather than uniting us for the common good."

          "Mr. Hatch said at the time that during Mr. Lee's tenure at Justice, the department had advocated the "same policies that initially led to his failure to be confirmed" in 1997. 

          "The Center for Equal Opportunity and the Institute for Justice said in a report that Mr. Lee had a "long record of promoting discrimination on the basis of race and sex through preferences and quotas," despite Supreme Court decisions overturning such policies."   (Washington Times 08/04/00 by Jerry Seper)
[link http://www.washtimes.com/national/default-20008423918.htm ]

 

Clinton Bypasses Hill With Appointment Move (08/03/00 - no link)

WASHINGTON (Associated Press) - "President Clinton removed ''acting'' from Bill Lann Lee's job title at the Justice Department, appointing him Thursday as assistant attorney general for civil rights during a congressional recess.

          "The White House announcement, made without comment while Clinton was playing golf, comes nearly three years after the president named Lee as his main civil rights enforcer on an acting basis to circumvent heavy Republican opposition.

          "Thursday's action allows Lee to hold the post through the end of Clinton's term in January without sending his nomination to Congress for approval.

          "Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, whose committee would have sat in judgment on a Lee nomination, said Clinton was the one playing partisan politics, installing Lee during the Republican National Convention.  ''The timing of this decision serves as further evidence of what we have come to know is true: The Clinton-Gore White House is intent on dividing our people rather than uniting us for the common good,'' Hatch said."  (Associated Press 08/03/00 by Sonya Ross)
[no link]

 

(DOJ)   Will Senate Roll Over and Accept Lee This Time?  (Mar. 1999)
          "
The jostling for position in the post-impeachment landscape has begun. Witness President Clinton and his renomination of Bill Lann Lee as the Justice Department’s top civil rights enforcer. Lee has held down the job on an acting, recess-appointment basis ever since the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to approve his nomination in December 1997."  The Senate committee refused Lee in 1997 because of his dogmatic support of racially discriminatory quotas and preferences.

          John Dickerson, Time Magazine's congressional reporter, says 'The formal renomination of Lee now is a testing of the political waters by Clinton.'  The President is betting that Lee will be an easy pickup this time because the Republicans are not in a strong position to put up a fight. The White House figures that the GOP has spent its ammunition on impeachment, meaning that what Republicans currently need "is a record of achievement, not another record of attack," says Dickerson. (based on Time Magazine, by Alain L. Sanders)
[link: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/time/daily/0,2960,21133-101990309,00.html ]
[related: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/time/daily/0,2960,10050,00.html]

(DOJ)  Bill Lann Lee's First Year (1997 - 1998):  Racial Quotas Du Jour?!
          Adversity.Net (local page, this site).  Dec. 15, 1998 is the one year anniversary of Bill Clinton's sneaky "temporary" appointment of the most pro-racial-quota head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division in the history of this country!  On 23 separate occasions during 1998 Bill Lann Lee attempted to muscle courts and local authorities to enforce reverse discrimination and racial quotas.  This is the sad story of Lee's first year on the job.   (Adversity.Net 12/15/98)

Related:  Back to Bill Lann Lee by George F. Will (dead link)
          "A year has passed since President Clinton accompanied his appointment of Bill Lann Lee as assistant attorney general for civil rights -- as "acting assistant attorney general in perpetuity -- with that breezy acknoledgment:  The appointment was not "entirely constitutional".  (Washington Post 12-13-98, page C-7)
[former link http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-12/13/038r-121398-idx.html]

Alternate Link:  In Lee case, Clinton showed true colors by George F. Will (same story)
          [ Deseret News link @ http://deseretnews.com:80/dn/view/0,1249,30000829,00.html ]

Related:  Inventing Mr. Lee's Past by Balint Vazsonyi
          Author Vazsonyi closely examines Bill Lee's resume, and finds some interesting facts.  Lee was NOT admitted to Yale under the terms of Affirmative Action, as Lee often claims.  Lee entered Yale before the school implemented its first AA program.  Whence comes the 'racial quota' chip on Lee's shoulder?  After all, Lee enjoyed the best of the best in American without AA!   (Originally in the Washington Times 2-17-98)
[ link http://www.founding.org/column32a.html ]

(DOJ) Defying the Rule of Law (Feb. 1999 - Institute for Justice)
          Excellent analysis regarding the racial-quota record of Bill Lann Lee, by Roger Clegg, VP and legal counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity, and by Clint Bolick, VP and director of litigation for the Institute for Justice.

          "More than a year has passed since an unprecedented set of circumstances placed Bill Lann Lee in command of the nation's most powerful civil rights law enforcement arsenal. The president nominated Lee, the former western regional counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. It was the third consecutive time that President Bill Clinton tapped someone from [NAACP's] LDF for that position.

          "Lee brought with him a controversial record of judicial activism and support for racial preferences, and following a lengthy hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he failed to win majority support. Democratic members of the Committee filibustered their own President's nominee, and the nomination went no further. Bypassing the Senate's constitutional "advise and consent" role, President Clinton appointed Lee "Acting" Assistant Attorney General on December 15, 1997, a status Lee still holds more than a year later despite its doubtful legality."  (Roger Clegg, Clint Bolick, Feb. 1999)
[link http://www.ij.org/media/lann_lee/ ]

(DOJ) Black Leadership Network Opposes Bill Lann Lee 1999 Re-Nomination (02/18/99)
          "Members of the African-American leadership network Project 21 urge the U.S. Senate to reject President Clinton's expected renomination of activist lawyer Bill Lann Lee as Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Lee's unrelenting implemention of divisive racial preference policies while serving as "acting" head of the Division are at odds with Supreme Court and lower court decisions.

          " 'Bill Lann Lee's rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul policies are not only out of step with the mainstream of the American polity, but are out of step with the majority of the Democratic Party as well,'   said Project 21 member Council Nedd, the director of government affairs for Citizens Against Government Waste.

          "Mr. Lee's nomination to become the nation's chief civil rights enforcer deadlocked in the Senate Judiciary Committee in November of 1997 due to his controversial support for race-based preferences in hiring, government contracting, education and voting laws. President Clinton then chose to bypass the Senate's constitutionally mandated 'advise and consent' role in the nomination process in December of 1997 by appointing Mr. Lee as the 'acting' head of the Division."  (Project 21, 02/18/99)
[link http://www.project21.org/P21PRLee299.html ]

(DOJ) GOP again to oppose nominee (02/17/99)
          "President Clinton and Sen. Orrin Hatch on Tuesday rekindled an old battle over the acting head of the Justice Department's civil rights division, Bill Lann Lee, whom Republicans accuse of favoring racial preferences. Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, urged Clinton not to renominate Lee, whose bid for the post of assistant attorney general for civil rights has been blocked twice, but who nonetheless has been heading the division since December 1997.

          "When first nominated in 1997, Lee encountered heavy criticism from conservatives who charged that he was a zealous promoter of racial preferences in affirmative action cases."  (Times Union, 02/17/99, by Mark Helm)
[link http://www.timesunion.com/news/story.asp?storyKey=6584&newsdate=2/17/99 ]

(DOJ) White House Attempts to Defend Lee's Re-nomination (02/16/99)
          "The White House on Tuesday rejected calls that President Clinton nominate [a non-quota oriented] alternative to Bill Lann Lee as the nation's top civil rights enforcer, saying Lee's critics have 'a demonstrable lack of knowledge' of his performance in the job [assuming his 'job' included ramming racial quotas down our throats] .

          "Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, urged Clinton on Tuesday to nominate 'a confirmable candidate' for the civil rights post, saying Lee has already been considered.  'During Lee's tenure, the Justice Department has advocated the same policies that initially led to his failure to be confirmed as assistant attorney general,'  Hatch said.  He said he told deputy attorney general Eric Holder last week that Lee's temporary appointment has exceeded 14 months in violation of a law on federal vacancies that Clinton signed in October.

          "Two [anti-quota] conservative groups, the Institute for Justice and the Center for Equal Opportunity, issued a report Tuesday concluding that, under Lee, the Justice Department has 'continued to defend the constitutionally indefensible' when it comes to affirmative action.

          " 'We do not suggest that every action ... exceeds Lee's proper discretion as the nation's foremost civil rights law enforcement official,'  the report said.  'But the pattern is unmistakable: Lee sides with racial classifications in government contracting, employment, voting and education in nearly every instance, placing the federal civil rights arsenal at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court's repeated pronouncements that racial classifications are presumptively impermissible.' " (AP, via Las Vegas Sun, 02/16/99)
[link http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-wh/1999/feb/16/021600150.html ]

(DOJ) Racial Quota Foes Oppose Bill Lee (02/16/99)
          "Expecting the re-nomination of Bill Lann Lee to the government's top civil rights post, conservative foes of [racial quotas and set-asides] issued a report Tuesday blasting Lee's performance in his year as "acting" assistant attorney general for civil rights.

          "More than a year ago, Republican senators blocked Lee's nomination, charging his views on affirmative action amounted to support for quotas and racial preferences. Despite the setback, Attorney General Janet Reno named Lee to fill the same post he was denied, on [a seriously questionable] 'acting' basis.

          "At a Tuesday press conference on Capitol Hill, former Attorney General Edwin Meese III attacked as 'a subterfuge' the appointment of Lee to head the civil rights division, despite the Senate's deadlock over the nomination.  Conservative activists Clint Bolick and Roger Clegg issued a report accusing Lee of continuing to back racial preferences through a series of Justice Department lawsuits filed during the past year.

          " 'Sadly, in all too many instances, Bill Lann Lee has wielded the resources of the Civil Rights division to pursue racial preferences in government contracting, employment, voting and education,'   Bolick said."  (CNN, 02/16/99, by Terry Frieden)
[link http://cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/16/lee/ ]


DOJ - Racial Profiling

          Editor's Note:  The U.S. Department of Justice enforces a Good Racial Profiling doctrine which states that any crime statistic, employment test, academic test, or personnel policy on which protected minorities perform more poorly than whites and Asians constitutes a de facto case of racial discrimination.  Conversely, DOJ advances the notion that whites and Asians are "privileged" and therefore are never discriminated against.


Racial Profiling?   You can only run so far from the truth.  (10/16/00)

[By an anonymous officer of the Los Angeles Police Department as published in the National Review.]

          "There was much discussion of racial profiling in last week's presidential debate, but after scouring the transcript in search of some honesty on the subject, I've come away disappointed. A good friend is a psychiatrist here in Los Angeles, and when he treats patients prone to rationalization he falls back on a time-tested maxim: You can only run so far from the truth.

          "And the truth, gentle readers, is that in the United States of America in the year 2000 A.D., certain ethnic groups tend to violate the law in numbers far in excess of their representation in the population. The debate may rage as to why this is so, but only after accepting the truth can honest dialogue take place.

          "Don't take my word for it. Go to the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Statistics website and look up Tables 40 and 46 [you may download the report in Acrobat PDF format from  http://www.adversity.net/DOJ Crime Stats/DOJ_1998_crime_stats.pdf ], where you will discover that in 1998, the most recent statistics available, blacks committed about 38 percent of the reported robberies while making up about 13 percent of the population. Consider further that nearly all of those robberies were committed by black males between the ages of 15 and 24, and you'll come to the realization that a tiny demographic group is responsible for a whole lot of trouble out there.

          "These statistics are based on the perceived race of the perpetrators as reported by the victims. To disbelieve these numbers, you must subscribe to the phantasmagoric notion that robbery victims, a large number of whom are black themselves, are so consumed with racial animus that they will falsely describe their assailants to the police so as to further a negative stereotype."

(The opinions expressed are solely those of the anonymous LAPD officer, and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.)   [National Review 10/16/00 by Anonymous.]
[link http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment101600b.shtml ]

DOWNLOAD 1998 Dept. of Justice Racial Crime Statistics in Adobe PDF Format:
http://www.adversity.net/DOJ Crime Stats/DOJ_1998_crime_stats.pdf


END of DOJ Fed News Page.


Return to Federal Agency News

Main NEWS Links Index

Main Site Index:

Top:
Go to Top of Page
MAIN NEWS
Index

by category
DONATE
Contributions are tax-deductible
HORROR
STORIES

and case studies
TERMS
and Definitions
SEARCH
Site
LEGAL HELP
Firms and Resources
LINKS MESSAGE
Board
GO:  Home Page
Home
Page Index
URL's and page names for site
Favorite
EDITORIALS

National opinion
DIRTY RACIAL
POLITICS

How Quotas are Enforced
EDITOR'S DESK
What's Hot!
RACIAL
PROFILING

D.O.J. Requires It!
EDUCATIONAL
TESTING

News Analysis
CENSUS 2000
Racism
ABOUT US

Copyright 2002 Adversity.Net, Inc., an IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt educational organization.  For problems or questions regarding this web contact editor@adversity.net    Last updated: October 17, 2000.

Go to Adversity.Net Home Page

*  We use the term reverse discrimination reluctantly and only because it is so widely understood.  In our opinion there really is only one kind of discrimination.