Senate blocks Obama’s civil rights nominee
The Senate filibustered President Obama’s nominee to lead the Justice Department’s civil rights division, with seven Democrats joining Republicans Wednesday in arguing his past history defending a convicted cop-killer made him the wrong man for the job.

The defeat of Debo P. Adegbile, who as a lawyer for the NAACP filed a brief arguing that former Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal’s murder trial was tainted by racism, is a major blow to Mr. Obama. It comes even after Democrats changed the rules last year to overcome filibusters with just 50 votes — but on Wednesday Majority Leader Harry Reid couldn’t even muster all of his own troops.

A furious Mr. Reid hinted that Republicans’ opposition was based on racism, pointing to to several other black nominees that GOP senators had opposed earlier. But in the case of Mr. Adegbile, his defense of Abu-Jamal was too much for even some Democrats.

The Senate blocked Mr. Adegbile on a 47-52 vote, with eight Democrats voting along with Republicans for the filibuster. One of those was Mr. Reid, who had to change to vote for the filibuster in order to be able to ask for an eventual re-vote — which he did.

Signifying the heft of the vote, Vice President Joseph R. Biden was in the chair.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/5/senate-blocks-obamas-civil-rights-nominee/#ixzz2v76q5BQi
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Several Senate Democrats joined with Republicans on Wednesday to block President Barack Obama’s controversial nominee to lead the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

The rejection of Debo Adegbile in a 47-52 vote marks the first time that one of Obama’s nominees was thwarted since Senate Democrats changed filibuster rules in November. The nomination needed 51 votes to advance.

Continue Reading Text Size
-+resetAdvertisementLatest on POLITICO
McCain: Clinton comments 'right'
Senate blocks Obama's DOJ nominee
Facebook to monitor gun ads
Bachmann pans SB 1062 veto
Military ups game amid Ukraine crisis
Romney backs Ernst in Iowa race
Vice President Joe Biden presided over the vote in case he would need to break a tie.

(Also on POLITICO: Reid continues battle with Kochs)

Adegbile drew opposition and scrutiny from national law enforcement organizations as well as Senate Republicans for his work representing Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of killing Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981. Adegbile previously worked for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, which worked in support of Abu-Jamal’s efforts to overturn his death sentence.

That past led both of Pennsylvania’s senators — including Democrat Bob Casey — to oppose Adegbile’s nomination. Republicans spent much of Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday morning on the Senate floor criticizing the assistant AG choice pointedly for his work with Abu-Jamal.

“He decided to join a political cause … and in my view, by doing so he demonstrated his own contempt for — and frankly a willingness to undermine — the criminal justice system of the United States,” said Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). “I do not believe that Mr. Adegbile’s nomination is consistent with justice for the family of officer Danny Faulkner or for anyone else that cares about the law enforcement community.”

(Also on POLITICO: Facebook to monitor gun ads)

But it wasn’t just the GOP. Along with Casey, Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Chris [see forum posting rules] of Delaware voted to block the nomination. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) also voted no, which — under Senate rules — allows him to bring the nomination back to the floor at a later time.

“It is important that we ensure that Pennsylvanians and citizens across the country have full confidence in their public representatives — both elected and appointed,” Casey said, explaining his opposition in a written statement. “The vicious murder of Officer Faulkner in the line of duty and the events that followed in the 30 years since his death have left open wounds for Maureen Faulkner and her family as well as the City of Philadelphia.”

The GOP most likely would have blocked the high-profile Obama nominee before Democrats changed the Senate rules on Nov. 21, 2013, to lower the voting threshold needed to clear a filibuster on most presidential nominees from 60 votes to a simple majority. President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate Adegbile to the assistant AG post on Nov. 14.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that if Democrats approved Adegbile, they shouldn’t be surprised if Republicans continue to slow confirmation of Obama’s nominees, given that the party can no longer reject the president’s picks.

“The nominee inserted his office in an effort to turn reality on its head, impugn honorable and selfless law enforcement officers and glorify an unrepentant cop killer,” McConnell said. “Members of the majority who voted for this heavy-handed [rules change] last fall will be responsible for the nominee’s confirmation today.”

The nomination was also opposed by local Pennsylvania officials as well as national organizations like the Fraternal Order of Police and the National Association of Police Officials, which described Adegbile as someone who “made his name defending one of the most notorious and unrepentant cop killers around.”

A group of 86 organizations, including the AFL-CIO and NAACP, wrote to senators this week urging them to support Adegbile. In the letter the groups called Adegbile “one of the preeminent civil rights litigators of his generation” and made no mention of Abu-Jamal.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/senate-blocks-debo-adegbile-justice-department-104297.html#ixzz2v77TlB3y

Chancetragedy wrote:
I can't and won't argue with the fact there are more qualified candidates for sure. But to be rejected based solely(speculation as that's all the article really cites) on the fact you were an NAACP lawyer who filed a motion defending someone who (whether you agree or not is irrelevant) is regarded as having some pretty good civil rights ideas and papers written is not exactly what I would deem on the up and up.

Manchu wrote:Regardless if one "obviously" did the deed, one should go free if the state cannot prove it or very badly bungles their case.

 Jihadin wrote:
Stigma of helping a "Cop Killer" of avoiding "justice".

 Ahtman wrote:
For instance, he was never denied a defense, and no one has claimed wasn't allowed one.

The instance in question wasn't a lawyer defending the person as their counsel in court, but as a third party years later.

 Ahtman wrote:
And the argument wasn't even very good. It wasn't that he should go free because he wasn't guilty, but that it was ok to shoot the cop back then because race relations were more problematic.

 whembly wrote:
"mindless police worship"?

I think kanwulen would object to that.

 Frazzled wrote:
Chevera Tshirts.

 Jihadin wrote:
Polunis he got denied the position.

 Ouze wrote:
I don't think anyone's argued that he shouldn't have effective counsel in principle, or that he didn't have effective counsel in actuality. Lead me a little because it feels like now we're having a new and different argument.

 Jihadin wrote:
Sebster LOL silly Aussie you know what he meant

 Ouze wrote:
Only a lefty mouth breather, as Frazzled would put it, wouldn't know what he meant. Cut your hair, cut off the hemp bracelet, drop the hacky sack, and get a job!

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Chevera Tshirts.

Chevara?

Only a lefty mouth breather, as Frazzled would put it, wouldn't know what he meant. Cut your hair, cut off the hemp bracelet, drop the hacky sack, and get a job!

My God, I hate the Che Guvara Worship. The Guy ended up founding a horribly despot country. Was more about fighting revolutions then actually having one end.

 Peregrine wrote:
But the problem is that when you make defending the "wrong" person political poison you do effectively deny that defense, because nobody with career ambitions is going to be willing to be associated with it. You can fall back on the "that's just politics" argument, but my point was that the system is utterly broken if that's the case. And we shouldn't refrain from criticizing it just because it's "just politics".

 Ouze wrote:

 sebster wrote:
I know what he meant, I was asking if this was a brand new way of saying people's names. Much more efficient than saying a whole first name and then a whole second name. Much quicker just to say Chevara, Bobama...

Nevertheless, I must admit I have no idea what obscure British directors have to do with his argument, no matter how good they look on a shirt.

Spoiler:

fastest photoshop ever

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
My God, I hate the Che Guvara Worship. The Guy ended up founding a horribly despot country. Was more about fighting revolutions then actually having one end.

 RiTides wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
I have never understood the Mumia abu-Jamal fan club. You want to argue that he's redeemed himself in prison sufficient to wiggle out of the death penalty, I could buy that argument (I would not agree but the courts did, so whatever), sure. You want to say it's immoral to even have the death penalty, ever, as my mom does, I could see that argument as well (I would not agree).

But, free him? Seriously, wtf? The evidence is pretty overwhelming. He did it. He definitely did it. I don't care about his politics, he murdered a cop. They found his gun, registered to him. The rounds match the gun. He was wearing a fething shoulder holster. The bullets in him came from the cop. Sure, there were eyewitness inconsistencies, but that's human nature, there always will be. His best explanation is a SODDI defense? Don't make me laugh, man.

Agreed, Ouze...

And what an insane nomination for a leading role in the justice department. Don't you want prosecutors, not high profile defense lawyers, for that kind of position? And how could they not think this would come up? That's not the kind of baggage you bring to a political discourse if you want to stick around very long

No one is talking about Che Guevara. We're talking about someone else.


I was actually. I just spelled the name poorly. My bad.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/583225/6605750.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/583225/6605750.page GMT

 Frazzled wrote:
I was actually. I just spelled the name poorly. My bad.