Holder DOJ Uses Newspaper for Statistical Data Against Rick Scott
Florida Governor Rick Scott’s voting case against the Holder Justice Department has taken a strange but predictable turn. Recall that radical lawyers in the DOJ Voting Section filed a lawsuit against Florida seeking to prevent the removal of foreigners from the voter rolls. Justice has now turned to the print media for “expert” statistical analysis on the racial impacts of Florida’s policies.
It turns out at least 50 of these foreigners have voted in Florida elections. If done in a federal election, this constitutes a federal crime. Yet why has the Justice Department not charged these individuals?
Of course we all know the answer – preventing the removal of the foreigners is more important to Eric Holder than prosecuting the ones who voted illegally.
Now comes the Justice Department’s attempt to obtain an injunction against Florida from proceeding with the removal of the foreigners. DOJ claimed that removal of foreigners would have a racially discriminatory impact. That is, more Hispanics would be removed than whites as a percentage of the population.
Well, so what?
Florida has punched back in this memo:
The fact that a program to remove non-citizen voters affects a large percentage of minorities is neither surprising, nor remotely indicative of impermissible discrimination. Any program that removes non-citizens from the rolls in Florida, even if 100% accurate, will undoubtedly have this result. But DOJ cannot and does not argue that the accurate removal of non-citizens has any impermissible disparate impact.
Translation: of course there will be a disparate racial impact when illegal foreigners are removed from the voter rolls. What else would you expect? That alone doesn’t make it illegal.
DOJ’s purist and radical argument on this point would surprise nobody who has read my book Injustice. This species of radical racialism, where any difference in outcomes with a statistical correlation, justifies the flexing of federal power.
Holder’s an unflinching racist. His boss spent 20 years in a racist cult that think of Louis Farrakhan as a hero. Why liberals give these guys a pass is simply beyond me. One thing’s for sure – liberals are as dazzled and confused by race as a deer in the headlights. The problem is that they’re dragging the whole country in front of the car by enabling the wholesale transfer of the Third World to America.
The entirety of Latin America couldn’t have stood against Germany ALONE in WW II let alone Japan as well. What’s gonna happen to circumvent empire building in Asia or Europe next time with America being half Third World? See what you want with political correctness but I see no exceptionalism of any kind outside the West and the West is fading – fast.
Yes, heh, heh, that’s part of the plan! We’ll have no more corporate imperialists in our perfected world! Only benevolent autocrats like…like … well, there must be one out there somewhere.
Nice comment, which has zero to do with the coward and lying AG stopping Fl from removing ILLEGAL voters from its voting roll.
I moved out of Florida in 2007 and I am still able to get absentee voting privilege I now wonder how many elections that I voted for over the past 5 years and how I voted the Florida voters board does not let you see when your vote was placed they only ask where to send your ballot I did cancel my status 6 months ago and it still reads that I am able to vote How many others have left the state and continue to vote that may be the real issue
Just laying the legal groundwork to challenge the Florida electoral votes in court after the election.
Eric Holder shouldn’t have been confirmed by the Senate. Here is the 17 of the Republican Senators who voted for this man even knowing about Marc Rich and the his help in getting the pardon for 16 Puerto Rican Cop Killing Terrorists. Senators Hatch, Graham, Bond, Alexander, Bennett, Chambliss, Collins, Corker, Grassley, Gregg, Isakson, Kyl, Lugar, Murkowski, Sessions, Snowe, Specter, Voinovich and of course John McCain of Arizona.
Because of wanting to ‘get along’ we have the unelected in office doing tremendous damage to this country. If only we had people who cared as much about the country as their hair-do’s we wouldn’t be having a runaway AG who is turning the office into a branch of the KGB and Communist Party and 56 Czar’s who are tearing the country apart for Socialism.
“Of course we all know the answer – preventing the removal of the foreigners is more important to Eric Holder than prosecuting the ones who voted illegally.”
No, no, no, Mr. Adams.
“Preventing the removal of the foreigners is more important to Eric Holder than preventing the disenfrancising of the American citizen’s vote.”
Fixed.
Of course protecting the rights of the American citizens is his job. But maybe not. AG shall “(a) prosecute for all offenses against the United States; (b) prosecute or defend, for the government, all civil actions, suits, or proceedings in which the United States is concerned;…”
“…the United States Attorney retains, among other responsibilities, the duty to “prosecute for all offenses against the United States.” See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 547(1). This duty is to be discharged under the supervision of the Attorney General. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 519.”
Here’s irony for you — Currently the DOJ Homepage features a piture of Holder at a podium. Caption: “Protecting Access to the Ballot Box” “Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the League of Women Voters Convention”
U.S. Mem. 17 & n.6 (emphasis added).
And here is where my brain locked up and froze. What the heck does this mean, what is the reference? How am I, in my work a day world, to keep track of this nonsense?
And here we all are.
We try to make rules to keep the crooks out, but the crooks are the ones making the rules. And enforcing them, or not.
Do over nation.
Just a legal citation to the memo from the DOJ. Not complicated stuff. Translation: Memo of the United States on page 17, footnote 6.
Thank you.
And here i am visiting in the San Diego area and listening to ESPN radio on the weekend. Every hour there are Mexican political ads for the candidates followed by “state” ads telling voters that voter ID is required to vote on July 1 and misuse of the voter ID can lead to jail time. And these are the illegals that can come to the USA and vote with no ID or consequences! What a joke!
This is why I believe that, when Romney is elected, he’s going to have to clean house at the Justice Department. They are so used to acting lawless they won’t know how to do the right thing.
Bush did NOT clean house after he was elected because the Democrat Senate held up confirming appointments. For this reason, much of Clinton’s appointees were left in place to sabotage the DoJ until Gonzales tried to remove the worst of them in a wholly legal dismissal. The Democrats raised an unholy fuss and managed to force the AG out. Senator Ted Stevens was one victim of the politicized DoJ as his conviction on bribery charges shows. The conviction was later dismissed and some DoJ prosecutors fired for cause but it was too late for Stevens. Romney had better not make that mistake again. Clinton fired the whole lot of US Attorneys for reasons of patronage and nothing was said. Of course, the Democrats held Congress then.
Would it really be so bad NOT to have anyone home at the Doj for a little while?
Let ‘em block FOREVER!
If we can’t remove them, can we defund the DOJ? Send all legal matters back to the states. Move HS, FBI and ATF to the DOD.
Make the progs scream.
When a corporation changes management, the first thing we do is to perform a fitness assessment of those who will have responsibility for contributing to the direction being set by the new management team. Unfortunately, in government, we are left with the dregs of the past administrations who have survived by doing nothing to ruffle feathers. And the character of government is left to ner-do-wells who have seniority and nothing more as a credential. What a sad state of affairs for setting the stage to form a new leadership team. When you unwelcome left-overs, please leave the refrigerator door ajar so the food will rot
Shades of IPCC ‘grey literature’.
The whole Obama administration is racist, or else they would not be bringing in illegal Mexicans to put young blacks out of work. Who else is affected, young blacks looking for that first job. Fast food, restaurants, gardening have all gone to illegals, half the jobs I had as a kid i would not have been able to get today. And I still can’t get a coffee at the MDs in Katy, TX because they don’t speak English. The small change of Los Cucos restaurants, i hear had a visit from INS, none of the waiters there before are there now…sort of makes you go, hmmmmm!
A lawyer from Virginia has emailed me this Atkins v. Fischer, 232 F.R.D. 116 (D.D.C. 2005):
Third, Plaintiff fails to recognize that newspaper articles constitute inadmissible hearsay, and cannot be admitted into evidence to support the truth of the matter asserted. “Evidence constituting hearsay is normally inadmissible because it lacks sufficient guarantees of reliability.” Hutira v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 211 F.Supp.2d 115, 123 (D.D.C.2002) (citing Arthur Best, Evidence: Examples and Explanations at 61 (2d Ed.) (noting that “the reliability problems of out-of-court statements are thought to be so great that common law decisions and the Federal Rules of Evidence take the position that a rule of exclusion will produce the fairest results overall”)). Courts have routinely concluded that “ ‘[u]nsupported newspaper articles usually provide no evidence of the reporter’s perception, memory or sincerity and, therefore, lack circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness.’ ” Id. (quoting Eisenstadt v. Allen, 113 F.3d 120, 1997 WL 211313 (9th Cir.1997) (“newspaper articles clearly fall within the definition of hearsay … and, thus, are inadmissible”) and citing United States v. Harris, 271 F.3d 690, 696 (7th Cir.2001) (noting that “daily newspapers are not reliable evidentiary sources”)). As such, courts within this Circuit have consistently barred newspaper articles from introduction as evidence due to the fact that they constitute inadmissible hearsay. See, e.g., Metro. Council of NAACP Branches v. Fed. Communications Comm’n, 46 F.3d 1154, 1165 (D.C.Cir.1995) (“We seriously question whether a New York Times article is admissible evidence of the truthfulness of its contents.”); United States v. Pollard, 161 F.Supp.2d 1, 6 (D.D.C.2001)(barring admission of newspaper articles as insufficient proof of a party’s claim). Given that Plaintiff’s accusation of tax fraud rests solely upon inadmissible hearsay that cannot stand as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted, Plaintiff’s argument is without foundation and does not warrant the Court’s further consideration.
h/t to the lawyer from Virginia.
Maybe Florida should be permitted to remove only those foreigners with anglo-sounding names, things like “George Zimmerman.” They are diverse at all, and this would clearly have no racially disparate impact since white folks don’t count.
Mr. Adams–
Your lede has this excerpt:
> Justice has now turned to the print media for “expert” statistical analysis on
> the racial impacts of Florida’s policies.
You put quotations marks around “expert”. From where does this quotation come from? I could not find a reference that the DOJ claimed the referenced article was “expert”. Where was the “expert” claim made?
Really? This is your nitpick?
Here’s some clarification for you. Generally, when you are making a claim you use statistics compiled by “experts,” or you provide “expert” opinion/analysis from persons who are “experts” in their fields, to back up your claim.
In this case the “expert” statistics used was from a newspaper article.
Savvy?
Add to that Lolly that the Miami Herald was the newspaper contained in “Exhibit 11″ in the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order filed by the DOJ. They actually attached the Miami Herald article as an exhibit.
Christian-we are seeing this disproportionality assertion as grounds to gut academics in secondary and higher ed.
The nature of the coursework itself has to change and the teaching styles and what earns credit in order for there to be no discrepancy in outcomes. That in turn means the focus has to turn to socializing and feelings and beliefs. Only in emotions are there no differences because of background.
How convenient that no one will end up knowing anything or practiced at thinking logically or abstractly. Just a herd of emotional citizens who feel and know what group they are supposed to bond with.
Would you believe all of education is being gutted so that students may “complete their studies without obstacles related to their social and economic background”?
I guess this is what happens when you have agency heads and unapproved czars who see the law and education and environmental regs as simply alternative weapons to fundamentally transform America.
All that would end in a nano-second if all federal funding was ended.
Do you need a software to make id cards?
The one thing I regret about Romney’s victory and the Republicans taking both Houses in November is the certainty of the leftist cockroaches who will surface. Next year, every imagined error or fault will be the subject of endless commie lectures.
Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink and their ilk will be on the “news” every night screaming about the evil of the Romney administration. Maxine will call for censure of a white Republican for something he or she did 30 years ago.
The stupidity of these people will be intolerable!
“The one thing I regret about Romney’s victory and the Republicans taking both Houses in November…”
This reminds me of something I’ve been wondering about for a while. Where do conservatives stand with regards to the various Senate races this fall? So far, I haven’t seen a single article on this at PJM. I don’t even know WHICH seats are up for re-election in November let alone how any of the races are shaping up.
I’m curious to know where conservatives are believed to have a chance and where they don’t and what the Tea Party is doing to encourage good candidates.
Is it just too early for that at this point? Or are we ignoring the Senate altogether and just hoping that a new President will solve all the problems even if the Senate remains a Democrat-controlled body?
“Is it just too early for that at this point? Or are we ignoring the Senate altogether and just hoping that a new President will solve all the problems even if the Senate remains a Democrat-controlled body?”
It is a little early, plus no point in helping the Democrat-controlled press to choose the targets of their smears and mindless attacks this soon. Time enough for that later.
Dreary, Dickensian overkill to all this…
Holder isn’t protecting the rights of American citizens; quite the reverse, in fact.
Also, the “rights” exhumed from a very dark place by DoJ drones are applied, de facto and beyond dispute, to non-citizens at the expense and to the detriment of… ta-da… citizens. Isn’t there an oath of office involved somewhere?
Do you have to be a lawyer to figure this out, or to decide what to do? The next time Mr. Smith goes to Washington, he’ll have a shoulder-launched missile on each shoulder.
Meanwhile, the lawyers drone on… They gave up on the rule of law long ago and now need a new role. Their highest and best function is now as target practice?
Looks to me that however spurious this is, it’ll delay the actual purging of the rolls til after the election…. Given the speed with which our courts (don’t) work.
well, even thought it is painful, we have forced these racist radicals out into the light for all to see. off with their heads…
Reductio ad absurdem: If all murders were committed by members of a minority group, it would be racist to prosecute murderers.
There are dozens of Federal programs that have a “disproportionate impact” on minorities and therefore, they should be discontinued because disproportionate impact = discrimination.
That would be the end-result if this ridiculous logic of the DOJ were to be applied to Federal programs.
Efforts to clean the voter rolls are nondiscriminatory because there is zero effort made to identify or single out the minority status of a registrant.
Counting the number of letters in the last name of the voters would be just as meaningless as the stats from this stupid newspaper article.
Don’t let the foundations be cut away at the start:
Disparate Impact is a bullsh!t concept that never should have seen the light of day in our judicial system. It is total and unequivocal junk. It’s funny, though, to see who started it; lefties wanted to push wholly race-based laws and regulations through in their affirmative action pushes but began to be rebuffed as the “quota” cases started to make their way through and no one with a brain could argue against the insanity and racist nature of the policies. In reaction to this, the lefties turned and reformulated their policies to not mention race but to have intentional disparate impact on those race categories they had first tried to explicitly write in. They made law with INTENTIONAL disparate impact in order to try and do a side-run around common sense and equal protection.
Then, as they were successful, these same disingenuous idiots took their idea for disparate impact (which was the basis of much of their race-based regulations and laws) and turned that against laws and regulations that had no intention or motivation in being race-based, at all (in fact at those laws, regulations, tests, etc. specifically designed to take race out of the equation) and declared that anything that had a “disparate impact” – such as standardized tests – was illegal as it was racist in its effects. Somehow, unbelievably, many on the right gave in to this utter idiocy (even though these “disparate impact” tests were still never applied to the lefties’ rules that were intentionally framed to have disparate impact – in favor of the left’s protected pet groups) and it became accepted as part of AMerican legal doctrine. Accepted enough that an unqualified strong supporter of this idiocy was confirmed and seated on our SCOTUS – the same person for whom “empathy” became an accepted and certified legitimate main criterion for a judge or judicial decision, in direct opposition to over 3000 years of history of Western jurisprudence.
It is so sad to watch a great society allow itself to be killed like this. Pathetic.
Outstanding!
Let’s face it, Obama may win another term with the illegal immigrants, and dead voters.
elkh1: I suspect that is the ONLY way that Obama can win a second term.
Three words… Civil Rights Act. They got us by the hmm… Either accept disparate impact or you are a racist. This battle was lost decades ago. BTW I do not accept disparate impact.
Come now, don’t give up so easily. In the throne room at the Supreme Court, ‘disparate impact’ is a happy-hour phrase that’s been around since about 1970, about the same vintage as ‘penumbra’, about the same vintage as Roe v Wade.
Manna from above to Holder’s socialists at the DoJ, to be sure. But it should tell you all you need to know. If it doesn’t, well, there’s always the disparate impact of well placed satchels of plastique. We’re getting there…
So now it is racist to remove illegal voters from the rolls. Well, everything else you can imagine is racist now, at least if a repub does it, why not that.
I’ve heard people make a similarly circular argument regarding border enforcement. They would assert that Arizona’s law was racist because it would disproportionately target Latinos; someone would observe that it would logically do so for the reason that most of the illegal aliens in Arizona (often speaking only Spanish) are in fact from Mexico or points south; to which the first person would respond, “Of course most of the undocumented people in Arizona are Latino, and therefore you can’t have laws to weed them out, because it’s racist.”