Get PJ Media on your Apple

J. Christian Adams

J. Christian Adams is an election lawyer who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. His New York Times bestselling book is Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department (Regnery).  His website is Follow him on Twitter @electionlawctr.

Targeting Louisiana at the Justice Department

(Editor’s note: J. Christian Adams’ Crimes Against the Republic is available free for a limited time only, exclusively through the PJ Store.)

On the day that the Supreme Court struck down the part of the Voting Rights Act that required states to submit all election law changes to Justice Department employees for approval, possible attorney general nominee and current Secretary of Labor Tom Perez had soothing words.  Not to worry, Perez told these federal employees who no longer had anything to do after the Supreme Court’s holding in Shelby v. Holder striking down federal powers over state elections.  Louisiana, Perez told them, would be the full employment state, keeping them busy and employed because they would cook up ways to sue the Pelican State under civil rights laws.

If Perez is nominated to replace Eric Holder, he should have to explain his desire to target one state to keep federal employees busy.

Perez’s disgraceful comments reveal the moral bankruptcy of the modern civil rights movement, and particularly the abuses of power of the Justice Department Civil Rights Division. Perez was then the assistant attorney general for civil rights, and telegraphing a desire on his part to see a series of lawsuits, voluminous enough to employ dozens of lawyers and staffers suddenly with nothing to do.  His remark revealed how this administration views the balance of power between the federal government and the states when it comes to civil rights.


During the Kennedy administration, Attorney General Robert Kennedy pursued civil rights cases in the south because it was the right thing to do.  In the Obama administration, Attorney General Eric Holder has pursued civil rights cases to give federal employees something to do.

The other reason Holder has pursued voting cases against states like Texas, Louisiana and North Carolina is to help the Democratic Party.  Attacks on election integrity laws, such as voter ID, are crass political crusades to scare minority voters.  Lawsuits against voter ID and election integrity are efforts to scare minorities that Jim Crow is back.  Holder is trying to motivate minority voters through fear.

The Supreme Court this week allowed election integrity laws in North Carolina and Texas to remain in effect for the upcoming election.  This is bad news for Holder, and he knows it.  If elections take place with voter ID and other election integrity laws — and minority voters still manage to vote in regular numbers — then it will look like Holder has been crying wolf.  Justice Department lawyers hoped their theory of disenfranchisement would never be tested in the real world.

Posted at 11:44 am on October 19th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Early Voting Americans Surrender Voice on Ebola

We always knew early voting was an expensive and divisive bad idea, but Ebola has provided another reason to oppose it.  The government’s response to Ebola has become one of the most important, and passionate, issues of the midterm elections.  Surveys show the overwhelming majority of Americans are paying attention, and are worried.

Yet one million Americans have already surrendered their voice on the issue because they voted early.  From the AP:

Midterm elections are less than three weeks away, yet more than 904,000 Americans already have cast their ballots, with almost 60 percent of those early votes in Florida, according to data compiled by The Associated Press from election officials in 11 states.

How unfortunate.  This is the one of the serious problems with early voting — voters making dumb or uninformed decisions about fast-moving events.  If you voted weeks ago, you voted before the administration’s  bungling of the Ebola problem became conventional wisdom.  The list of congressional leaders calling for a travel ban continues to grow.  Yet the Obama administration continues to oppose it for some frighteningly outlandish reasons.

These are the types of critical issues, life-and-death issues, that voters would have been well-advised to consider when Americans have been casting ballots for centuries — on Election Day.  As I wrote at the Washington Times:

First, early voting produces less-informed voters. After they cast an early ballot, they check out of the national debate. They won’t care about the televised debates, won’t consider options, and won’t fully participate in the political process.

Early voting means stubborn voters will make uninformed decisions prematurely. Voting even one week early produces less-informed voters and dumbs down the electorate. …

Those who vote a month in advance are saying they don’t care about weighing all the facts. Early voting encourages stubborn and uninformed voters — something the country could use fewer of, not more.

If you’ve voted early in the past, you should resolve to stop. Wouldn’t you rather listen and learn all you can before you commit?

Folks who vote early should be handed a sticker that says, “I Voted (early without knowing all the facts).” The “I voted” stickers should be reserved for the rest of us who vote on Election Day.

So, vote early, vote dumb.  The people who vote early sacrifice information to make a fully informed, and sometimes terribly serious, decision.

Posted at 6:46 am on October 17th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Gay Totalitarians in Texas

Churches have received subpoenas issued by the city of Houston demanding copies of sermons.

Houston is probing opposition to a ballot referendum pertaining to an ordinance proposing a local discrimination law affecting gays. (Bryan Preston posted this summary of the lawlessness taking place in Houston.) Over 50,000 petition signatures were gathered opposing the ordinance. Now the city, run by the first openly gay mayor, Annise Parker, is retaliating and demanding that churches turn over sermons.

You read that correctly.

This is the sort of government behavior that used to be confined to two-bit third-world regimes.

The gay rights movement was on solidly moral ground when it sought to end laws criminalizing private consensual conduct between adults. But like so many other elements of the “civil rights” movement, it abandons the moral high ground when it starts using the government to shake down political opponents.

This is the same species of shakedown the IRS conducted. Don’t like your political opponents? Then use government power to harass them. Send them intrusive inquiries and let them know who is boss.

In Houston, the boss is looking for payback.

You wonder if the officials pushing these subpoenas against the churches have ever been to church.  Signs point to no — because how many “sermons” are actually reduced to a document?

Not all of the best ones, I can attest.

Houston Mayor Parker

Houston Mayor Parker

This is the same sort of thuggish behavior we saw out of the Tom Perez-run Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. Don’t like Christian and Catholic pro-life activists? Drag them to court on phony charges. Harass them and make them bleed. The process is the pain, never mind the merits.

But every one of these harassing actions requires a signature — a signature of someone willing to act in confederacy with thuggery from other petty officials throughout history.

No doubt the lawyers signing complaints and subpoenas see nothing wrong with what they do. They will offer a litany of reasons why their thuggish actions are justified, and are in fact not thuggish.

Posted at 6:08 am on October 15th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Thought Eric Holder Was Bad? Meet Tom Perez

Numerous publications close to the White House have reported that Labor Secretary Tom Perez has emerged as the leading candidate to replace Attorney General Eric Holder. That Perez has a documented and repeating history of dishonesty, racialism, and radicalism shows that this administration feels unrestrained by conventional political wisdom. That the White House is dropping his name before an election should demonstrate to every Republican that Obama is fundamentally transforming politics in corrosive ways that the GOP seems ill-equipped to contain.

So who is Tom Perez?

Perez ran for Maryland attorney general in 2006. But his campaign ended when he was thrown off the ballot for the embarrassing reason that he didn’t practice law.

To Democrats, Perez is the charming, articulate, and politically savvy secretary of Labor. He is the president’s point man on Hispanic and labor issues. But to anyone objective who has paid close attention, Perez is a menace to the rule of law in ways that make Eric Holder seem like a kitty cat.

Much of Holder’s dirty work over the last six years was done by Tom Perez.

tom perez

Perez has a record of duplicity and dishonesty, sometimes even under oath. As assistant attorney general for civil rights under Holder, Perez famously set up a parallel email system so he could conduct his most controversial business using email accounts unreachable by federal law, or even by a Justice Department inspector general. On these private email accounts, he conducted some of his dirtiest dealings, like shaking down St. Paul, Minnesota, to ensure that the Supreme Court wouldn’t get to hear an appeal that might invalidate some of the prized racial set-asides this administration cherishes.

But his dealings with St. Paul were small potatoes compared to everything else he has done.

Perez testified falsely under oath to the United States Commission on Civil Rights — and it isn’t just me who says so.  I am frequently introduced in radio or television interviews as having “resigned over the Department of Justice’s handling of the New Black Panther voter intimidation case.” That isn’t accurate: I was at the Justice Department for over a full year after that case was dismissed.

I resigned on the day that Tom Perez provided false testimony about the case.

Posted at 6:53 am on October 14th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Five Voter Fraud Myths and Truths

PJ Media has put together a new publication about voter fraud called Crimes Against the Republic.

When it comes to voter fraud, there are several myths and several truths of note — enough to leave everyone unhappy.  Here are five:

1. Myth: President Obama won reelection because of voter fraud.  Nonsense.  The margins in key swing states such as Ohio and Virginia were too vast to be driven by voter fraud.  No voter fraud scheme can move tens of thousands of votes.  That’s impossible and would be detected.  The machinery of elections simply doesn’t allow for the possibility of organizing and procuring tens of thousands of votes.  If you are desperate for a singular explanation for Obama’s reelection, you should get to know Catalist.  This massive database and how the modern left uses it to drive turnout among the base are behind Obama’s releection, not voter fraud.  That Republicans and conservatives have absolutely no effective counterpart makes it even more so.

2. Fact: Voter fraud has altered the outcome of elections.  Senator Al Franken (D-Lino Lakes), the Saturday Night Live clown, is in the  United States Senate because of voter fraud.  Franken won his election because Minnesota has same-day voter registration, where a person can register to vote and cast a ballot simultaneously.  Felons were ineligible to vote but did so anyhow — by the thousands (1099 of them to be exact). This means that Franken owes his Senate seats to graduates of Faribault and Lino Lakes.  Remember, Franken won by only 312 votes.  News media in Minnesota contacted many of the felons and they admitted they were proud of their votes for Franken.  Not a one voted for Norm Coleman.  But it’s worse.  Al Franken was the 60th vote to pass Obamacare over a filibuster.  Because of voter fraud, Obamacare passed.

Posted at 1:56 pm on October 7th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Speaking at Stetson Law School on Holder’s Lawlessness

I will be speaking at noon Tuesday, October 7, at Stetson University School of Law.  The event is sponsored by the Federalist Society.  I will be talking about Eric Holder’s lawlessness at the Justice Department and the impact on this year’s elections.  I am told there is free Chick-Fil-A.  Classroom D.

Posted at 10:51 am on October 6th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

Ebola Fumble: Obama Fails to Use Legal Power to Deny Entry

As the Ebola epidemic has spread through West Africa over the last several months, President Obama has not used legal powers he possesses to help prevent the deadly virus from entering the United States.

Federal law gives the president the power to issue a proclamation to seal the borders to any class of aliens who pose a threat to the United States. The law is broad enough that Obama could have issued a proclamation months ago denying entry to any foreign national from the countries of Sierra Leone, Guinea, Nigeria or Liberia. Under the law, such a proclamation could have also included any passport holder who visited those countries as evidenced by visas or entry/exit stamps on the passport.

Section 1182 (f) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act gives the president this power, which the Obama administration has refused to use even as Ebola threatens Americans. The law states:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

This means that Obama could, in the time it takes to write out a few paragraphs, stop the flow of people into American communities who have been exposed to Ebola in West Africa.

As I previously reported, four direct flights from Ebola ravaged nations fly into the United States. (PJ link to “Air Ebola“.) Passport checks could be conducted prior to boarding aircraft bound for the United States from foreign destinations.

Also read: 

Piers Morgan DESTROYS Obama in Daily Mail Editorial

Posted at 10:11 am on October 3rd, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

‘CATALIST’: Obama’s Database for Fundamentally Transforming America

The Democrats and the institutional left have a new political tool that allows them virtually to ignore moderates yet still win elections.

This tool, the Catalist database, was employed in the 2012 election. That election defied conventional wisdom: Mitt Romney sought and won independent voters overwhelmingly, but still lost. If you wondered why the conventional wisdom about independents and moderates didn’t seem so wise in 2012, the answer is Catalist.

Beyond winning elections, Catalist also allows the Democrats to turn the policy narrative upside down and suffer no political consequence for implementing radical policies which appeal to their base. The Obama administration’s lurch to the far left without consequence can be understood by understanding Catalist. Obama thrives politically by satisfying his base. Simply, Catalist is a game changer not just for politics, but for policy. It is the left’s machinery for fundamentally transforming America.

And candidates, organizations, strategists, and consultants who do not understand what they are up against in Catalist risk being overrun.

I’ll explain how it works in a moment. I had the opportunity to explore the functionality and architecture of Catalist in a way few — if any — others on the opposite side of Catalist have had, and what I discovered sure explains a lot about the last six years.

No longer are Democrats anchored to the preferences of Americans in the middle. Bill Clinton’s triangulation is as obsolete as color film and bag phones. Obama has pushed policies far outside the mainstream, and even far outside popular will, but succeeded in wringing out an Electoral College majority in 2012 because of Catalist.

Unfortunately, Republicans have no functioning counterpart data tool to Catalist. They have multiple and competing shells of Catalist, but they have nothing on the collaborative scale as Catalist, largely due to the fact that Republicans won’t collaborate and are fiercely territorial of their competing data sets. Democrats and the institutional left, in contrast, have created a collaborative and fully integrated system that allows them to ignore the middle while extracting unprecedented turnout from a micro-targeted, ideologically far-left base.

Catalist is an example of the consultant, profit-driven culture of the GOP being beaten by the messianic crusader culture of the left.

Next: two examples demonstrate the power of the institutional left’s data tools.

Posted at 11:59 pm on September 17th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

White House Yanks Debo Adegbile Nomination

The Debo Adegbile story has ended.  The White House yesterday pulled his nomination to head the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division after it was defeated on a procedural vote in the Senate in March.  PJ Media was the first to report on the radical background of Adegbile within hours of the nomination being made.  After Adegbile was defeated in a procedural vote, left wing groups held out hope that another vote would be scheduled in the Senate and Democrats who opposed Adegbile would suddenly support him.  That didn’t happen.

Now there  is little chance that a nominee to head the Civil Rights Division can be confirmed before the November elections.  If Republicans take control of the Senate, don’t expect the White House to nominate someone with Adegbile’s radical background.


Posted at 9:01 am on September 16th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams

David Limbaugh’s Legal Brief for God: Jesus on Trial

The bloody 20th century saw more Christian and Jewish martyrs die for their faith than did any other century. In Mexico and Germany, in Sudan and Soviet Russia, in Korea and Poland, Christians and Jews died by the millions because they believed in God. This modern martyrdom occurred because men followed ideologies which believed men were greater than God in shaping the world. The masterminds of these bloodbaths assumed the world could be perfected to suit their ideologies.

One cannot know the history of the last century without recognizing the stark reality of black evil.

This evil that touched every corner of the globe is a starting point for David Limbaugh’s journey to faith. In his new book — Jesus on Trial (Regnery, 2014) — Limbaugh provides a lawyer’s brief on the certainty of God.

The book is a turnkey exploration of faith for those who doubt, and those who don’t. Limbaugh argues for God’s existence.  It is sequenced with the precision of a lawyer building a case based not just on faith in God, but on evidence, experience and facts.

aOf course faith will always ultimately remain just that, faith. But Limbaugh reaches across thousands of years of human history to argue on behalf of God’s existence.

Evil appears as Exhibit Number One.

To many, the violent sufferings of the last hundred years must mean there is no loving God who would allow so much suffering and pain.

Limbaugh contrasts the religious view “with the humanist’s view of the perfectibility of mankind. The humanist worldview, whether consciously or not, presupposes that man can be his own god — he has the ability to remake and perfect himself over time. But as the last century has shown, these godless ideas have led to totalitarian regimes that enslave and murder millions. Even if you deny that godlessness has led to this depravity, you will still have a difficult time making the case that mankind is on a linear path to enlightenment.”

The “sheer extensiveness and pervasiveness of evil in the world,” for Limbaugh, reinforces belief more quickly than anything else.

On the other extreme of Limbaugh’s evidentiary quiver are those impossible moments. Implausible events become the still, small voice that reinforces that the universe is ordered. Limbaugh retells the improbable story of Joseph, Jacob’s son:

His sovereign plan to nurture and preserve the emerging Hebrew nation is consummated in spite of and sometimes because of the sinful actions of certain people, including Joseph’s brothers. . . . had Jacob not doted on Joseph in the presence of his brothers, they would not have become jealous and hateful toward him. Had the brothers not harbored such hatred, they would not have plotted against him. Had the Ishmaelites not been on the road to Egypt, Joseph’s brothers probably would have killed him instead of selling him into slavery in Egypt. Had the cupbearer not been imprisoned with Joseph, he would not have been impressed by Joseph’s dream-inspiring gift. Had the cupbearer chosen to ‘remember’ Joseph when the cupbearer was released, Joseph may have been released from prison and would not have been available to interpret pharaoh’s dreams later. . . .the entire nation of Israel would likely have died in its incipiency.

I even omit Limbaugh’s more complete series of improbable events surrounding Joseph for the purposes of space! Limbaugh notes that the human and divine perception of evil come together in the wisdom of Joseph and the future nation of Israel.

Posted at 5:29 pm on September 15th, 2014 by J. Christian Adams