When three attorneys for the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department accuse a colleague of being “pro-black,” the primary problem is not “harassment” (p. 125) and anti-harassment training is not a solution. And no, using commitment to civil rights as hiring criterion for the Civil Rights Division is not inappropriate, any more than commitment to crime control is inappropriate in hiring a prosecutor.
Footnote Yes, this took place under Bush the Lesser. Why do you ask?
bring “pro-black,”?
maybe being “pro-black”
Correct. Fixed.
Is this somehow worse that a majority of the attorneys being convinced that whites should never be the beneficiaries of voting rights enforcement, or blacks subjected to it? That a facially neutral law should never be enforced in a neutral fashion? And that this ‘principle’ was so important anyone who dissented from it should be fired?
The report treats this as an ordinary political disagreement, but it strikes me as practically obscene.