The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case was a political controversy in the United States concerning an incident that occurred during the 2008 election. Two weeks before George W. Bush left office, the New Black Panther Party and two of its members, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, were sued by the Department of Justice on claims of voter intimidation for their conduct outside a polling station in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
The U.S. Department of Justice later narrowed the charges against Minister King Shabazz and dismissed the charges against Jackson, the New Black Panther Party and its leader. The dismissals led to accusations that the Obama administration's Department of Justice was biased against white victims and unwilling to prosecute minorities for civil rights violations. These charges were most notably made by J. Christian Adams, who in May 2010 resigned his post in the Department of Justice in protest over the Obama administration's alleged mishandling of the case, and by his former supervisor Christopher Coates.
Counter-accusations were made, including claims that the actual incident was relatively minor but had been blown out of proportion by individuals and groups with primarily political motives. Then-Attorney General Eric Holder denied claims that his Justice Department considered the race of alleged victims or perpetrators when deciding which cases to pursue. The case and its handling by the Department were investigated by the United States Commission on Civil Rights which released its report regarding the matter in December 2010. The Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility released its report in March 2011. The Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Justice released its report in March 2013.
Incident and initial response
The conduct for which members of the New Black Panther Party were accused of voter intimidation took place on Election Day in November 2008, at a polling station in a predominantly African-American, Democratic voting district of Philadelphia."Republicans Push For New Black Panther Hearing" . CBS News, July 27, 2010.
Two members of the New Black Panther Party, Minister King Samir Shabazz, and Jerry Jackson, stood in front of the entrance to the polling station in uniforms that have been described as military or paramilitary."Racial Motive Alleged in a Justice Dept. Decision" . The New York Times, July 6, 2010."2008 voter-intimidation case against New Black Panthers riles the right" . The Washington Post, July 15, 2010. Minister King Samir Shabazz carried a billy club, and is reported to have pointed it at voters while both men shouted racial slurs,"Holder's Black Panther Stonewall" . The Wall Street Journal, August 20, 2009. including phrases such as "white devil" and "you're about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.""Ex-Justice Dept lawyer says whites' rights ignored" . The Associated Press, July 1, 2010.
The incident drew the attention of police, who around 10:00 am, sent King Samir away in part because of his billy club. Jackson was allowed to stay, in part because he was a certified poll watcher . Stephen Robert Morse, a journalist and filmmaker, upon arriving at the scene, pulled out a Flip video camera and focused on Samir Shabazz. The incident gained national attention after being uploaded to YouTube and quickly going viral. No complaints were filed by voters about the incident, although poll watchers witnessed some voters approach the polls and then turn away, apparently in response to the New Black Panther Party members.
Legal proceedings The Department of Justice became aware of the Election Day incident and started an inquiry. In January 2009, less than two weeks before the Bush Administration left office, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice filed a civil suit under the Voting Rights Act against four defendants, including Shabazz.Government Accused in Voting Case . The New York Times, September 25, 2010.
In April 2009 Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer who was serving as a poll watcher at the polling station where the incident occurred, submitted an affidavit at the Department of Justice's request supporting the lawsuit, stating that he considered it to have been the most severe instance of voter intimidation he had ever encountered.
When none of the defendants who were charged appeared in court to answer the charges, the career attorneys pursuing the lawsuit assumed that they would win it by default. However the move to pursue a default judgment was overruled by two of their line superiors, Loretta King, who was acting Assistant Attorney General, and Steve Rosenbaum, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General. The federal government dropped charges against all defendants except Shabazz in May 2009. A spokesperson for the Department of Justice stated that the claims were "dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law." Questions about the validity of this explanation served as the basis for subsequent controversy over the case, which was investigated by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Republican members of Congress, and the DOJ.Dispute over New Black Panthers case causes deep divisions . The Washington Post, October 22, 2010. The federal government eventually obtained an injunction forbidding Shabazz from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling location.
Legal precedents Since the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965, only a handful of cases under the Act have been pursued by the Justice Department. One such case filed by the Department during the Bush Administration, known as United States v. Brown, was one of the first voting rights cases which involved a white plaintiff and a black defendant. The case precipitated deep divisions within the Justice Department. Some employees felt that the voting rights act was passed because historically, it was minorities who had been disenfranchised and that the department should therefore focus on cases filed by minorities, while others felt that it was intended to protect all voters in a race-neutral manner. Employees who worked the Brown case have described being harassed by colleagues due to the widespread belief that civil rights laws should not be used to protect white voters. One Justice Department official stated that "The Voting Rights Act was passed because people like Bull Connor were hitting people like John Lewis, not the other way around."
Controversy over political involvement In October 2010, a draft report from the Civil Rights Commission was posted on the political website TPM Muckraker, stating that political officials had been extensively involved in the decision to dismiss the case and that the Department of Justice had attempted to conceal their involvement.Report: Justice Dept. tried hiding officials' role in Panther lawsuit dismissal . The Washington Post, October 29, 2010. Civil Rights Commission chairman Gerald A. Reynolds confirmed the draft was authentic, but claimed it was not the most current version of the draft, and declined to immediately release the newest version or describe what revisions had been made to it.U.S. Civil Rights Commission sidetracked by member's protest . CNN, October 29, 2010. The Justice Department denied the allegations in the report.
Reactions to dismissal Questions about the validity of the explanation given by the Department of Justice for its actions in the case resulted in subsequent controversy. The case was investigated by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Republican members of Congress, and the Department of Justice.
In response to this controversy, the New Black Panther Party suspended its Philadelphia chapter and repudiated Minister King Shabazz in a posting at its website.Right call on the Black Panthers . The Washington Post, October 4, 2010. The party stated that Shabazz made "an honest error" by bringing a billy club to the polling station and that because of his doing so he had been suspended from the New Black Panther Party until January 2010.Panthers deem flap over voting 'error' . The Washington Times, April 26, 2010.
Reactions in Congress Some Republican members of Congress have been critical of the decision to narrow the scope of the case, including Representatives Frank Wolf of Virginia and Lamar Smith of Texas. Wolf was quoted by the Washington Times as asking, "If showing a weapon, making threatening statements and wearing paramilitary uniforms in front of polling station doors does not constitute voter intimidation, at what threshold of activity would these laws be enforceable?" Smith expressed skepticism at the Obama administration's stated justification for narrowing it, stating "The administration still has failed to explain why it did not pursue an obvious case of voter intimidation. Refusal to address these concerns only confirms politicization of the issue and does not reflect well on the Justice Department."No. 3 at Justice OK'd Panther reversal . The Washington Times, July 30, 2009.
In July 2009, Smith requested a meeting with the head of the Justice Department's Voting Rights Section in order to discuss whether political appointees had been involved in the decision to narrow the case, stating that news reports contradicted the Justice Department's earlier claim that political appointees had not been involved, and that earlier congressional inquiries about this had been unsuccessful.Senior Republican wants answers on Panther case . The Washington Times, July 31, 2009. Smith and Wolf also requested that the voter intimidation charges which had previously been dropped be refiled.Lawmakers seek refiling in Panther case . The Washington Times, July 31, 2009. In January 2010, after several unsuccessful attempts at obtaining the requested information from the department, Wolf sought a resolution of inquiry that would have forced the Justice Department to provide Congress with the details of why it narrowed the case. In a vote along party lines, the resolution was defeated 15-14.House panel rejects Panther resolution . The Washington Times, January 14, 2010.
In July 2010, seven Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to committee chairman Senator Patrick Leahy, calling for a hearing on potential "widespread politicization and possible corruption" in the Justice Department in regard to its decision to narrow the case. The letter quoted the testimony of J. Christian Adams (see below) that within the Civil Rights Division of the department there was "open hostility toward equal enforcement in a colorblind way", and requested a hearing to determine whether Adams' accusation was accurate.
Department of Justice Internal Investigations On August 28, 2009, in response to the complaints raised by Representative Smith, the Department of Justice's internal Office of Professional Responsibility opened an inquiry into the department's handling of the case.Internal probe in handling of Philly voting case . The Guardian, September 9, 2009. Smith praised the decision, stating "I am pleased that someone at the Justice Department is finally taking the dismissal of the New Black Panther Party case seriously."Inquiry opened into New Black Panther case . The Washington Times, September 9, 2009.