Holder's Actions: Lawful Or Unlawful?

Eric Himpton Holder Jr. is an American lawyer who served as the 82nd Attorney General of the United States from 2009 to 2015. Holder was the first African-American to hold the position. During his tenure, he was scrutinised for his involvement in several controversial cases, including the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation incident, Operation Fast and Furious, and the defence of drone strikes against alleged terrorists. In 2012, Holder became the first sitting attorney general to be held in contempt of Congress during an investigation into Operation Fast and Furious, although he was later cleared of the charges. This paragraph will explore the question: did Eric Holder break the law?

Did Eric Holder break the law with his involvement in Operation Fast and Furious?

Eric Himpton Holder Jr. was the 82nd United States Attorney General, serving from 2009 to 2015. He was the first African-American to hold the position.

In May 2011, Holder became the first sitting attorney general to be held in contempt of Congress during an investigation of the Operation Fast and Furious ATF gunwalking scandal. The scandal involved a failed federal firearms sting operation that allegedly allowed some 2,000 weapons to reach Mexican drug gangs.

In October 2011, the Justice Department released 7,600 pages of documents on Operation Fast and Furious. Republicans claimed that some of these documents indicated that Holder had been sent early memos about the operation and therefore must have known about it before early 2011. However, a later report from the Justice Department's independent inspector general found that Holder had no prior knowledge of the operation before early 2011, and he was cleared of the charges.

In April 2012, the House Oversight Committee, led by Chairman Darrell Issa, drafted a Contempt of Congress resolution against Holder, alleging that the committee was being "stonewalled by the Justice Department" on additional documents. On June 20, 2012, the Oversight Committee voted 23-17 along party lines to hold Holder in contempt of Congress for not releasing the requested documents. On the same day, President Obama asserted executive privilege over the remaining documents, and on June 28, 2012, the House voted 255-67 to hold Holder in contempt. The Justice Department declined to prosecute Holder on the contempt charge, citing Obama's assertion of executive privilege.

In September 2012, after a 19-month review, the United States Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General cleared Holder of any wrongdoing with regard to Operation Fast and Furious, stating that there was "no evidence" that he knew about the operation before early 2011. Holder himself expressed regret over the incident, stating that "some were so quick to make baseless accusations before they possessed the facts about these operations."

Did Eric Holder break the law by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act?

Eric Himpton Holder Jr. was the 82nd United States Attorney General and the first African-American to hold the position. He served from 2009 to 2015 under President Barack Obama.

In February 2011, Holder announced that the Department of Justice would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court. The 1996 law, signed by President Bill Clinton, banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage and allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states.

Holder's decision was based on a review of the law and a recommendation to President Obama, arguing that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional. He cited changing legal landscapes, including the Supreme Court ruling that laws criminalizing homosexual conduct were unconstitutional, and the repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

In United States v. Windsor (2013), the Supreme Court declared Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause, requiring the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages conducted by the states. This decision was described by Holder as "an enormous triumph for equal protection under the law for all Americans."

While Holder's refusal to defend DOMA was controversial and led to some criticism, it did not constitute a break of the law. As Attorney General, Holder had the authority to make this decision, and his actions were consistent with his role in upholding equal protection under the law.

Did Eric Holder break the law by failing to prosecute the IRS?

Eric Holder was the 82nd United States Attorney General, serving from 2009 to 2015. During his tenure, Holder was the first sitting Attorney General to be held in contempt of Congress during an investigation of the Operation Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal.

In 2013, a resolution proposing articles of impeachment was introduced against Holder, citing his alleged role in the scandal, his refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, his failure to prosecute anyone involved in the IRS targeting of groups, and his alleged perjury regarding the potential prosecution of members of the media for disclosing classified material. However, no further action was taken on the bill.

The Justice Department's inspector general refused to prosecute Holder and later cleared him of the charges. There is no indication that Holder broke the law by failing to prosecute the IRS.

Did Eric Holder break the law by refusing to prosecute financial institutions?

Eric Holder, the 82nd United States Attorney General, served from 2009 to 2015 under President Barack Obama. He was the first African-American to hold the position.

In March 2013, Holder testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that the size of large financial institutions made it difficult for the Justice Department to bring criminal charges when they were suspected of crimes. He stated that such charges could threaten the existence of a bank and, therefore, their interconnectedness may endanger the national or global economy. Holder's comments were in response to a letter from Senators Sherrod Brown and Charles Grassley, which criticised the Justice Department's policy of not prosecuting financial institutions, despite evidence of their involvement in financial crimes.

Holder's refusal to prosecute financial institutions has been described as a "victory for white-collar criminals". During his tenure, prosecution rates against crimes committed by large financial institutions were at a 20-year low. Instead of prosecuting, Holder repeatedly sought and reached deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements with large financial institutions. These institutions paid fines but faced no criminal charges and admitted no wrongdoing.

In a 1999 memorandum, Holder argued that government officials could take into account "collateral consequences" when prosecuting corporate crimes. This notion has been criticised as weak-kneed, especially considering the widespread mortgage fraud that was cited as the primary cause of the greatest financial failure since the Great Depression.

Holder's refusal to prosecute financial institutions has been viewed as a continuation of his pre-Attorney General career, where he worked for a corporate law firm known for serving Wall Street clients.

Did Eric Holder break the law by not prosecuting minority groups for civil rights violations?

During his six years in office, Eric Holder, the US's first Black Attorney General, was praised and criticised for his work. Holder has been accused of not prosecuting minority groups for civil rights violations. Former lawyers who served under the Bush administration claimed that the Department of Justice under Holder was unwilling to prosecute minorities for civil rights violations. This accusation was supported by three other Justice Department lawyers in recent interviews, although department officials strongly deny it.

Holder's response to the New Black Panther Party's behaviour outside a polling station during the election has been a particular point of contention. Two members of the Party stood outside the polling station in paramilitary uniforms, one carrying a nightstick. The Department of Justice dropped the charges, citing a lack of evidence. This decision was criticised by some, who felt that the behaviour constituted voter intimidation. However, Holder argued that the behaviour of the New Black Panther Party was not comparable to historical voter intimidation against minorities, which often involved acts of violence and murder.

Holder has also been accused of "racializing and radicalizing" the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and failing to enforce federal laws. On the other hand, he has been praised for championing the civil rights of minorities and gays and rebuilding the Civil Rights Division, which had been decimated during the Bush administration. Holder also set in motion "consent decrees" that mandated far-reaching change in police departments, putting a federal judge in charge of ensuring that change took place.

Overall, while Holder has been accused of not prosecuting minority groups for civil rights violations, the evidence is mixed, and the Department of Justice has denied the claims. Holder's supporters argue that he worked to strengthen the civil rights of minorities and repair relations between minority groups and the police.

Frequently asked questions