X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Conservative job applicants to the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division were deemed “good Americans” and “real Americans” by the former head of the division, Bradley Schlozman, according to a report released to the public last week by Justice’s two watchdogs. Applicants with Democratic leanings or actual civil rights experience, on the other hand, were, in Schlozman’s vocabulary, “crazy libs.” Authored by Inspector General Glenn Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief H. Marshall Jarrett, the report is the last in a series of four from an investigation into allegations of politicized hiring at the Justice Department. The report’s 67 pages are strewn with politically charged and racially tinged comments found in e-mails and voicemails from Schlozman, and relayed by his former colleagues in their recollections of conversations with him. The investigation even suggests Schlozman perjured himself before a congressional committee probing the U.S. Attorney firings. Fine and Jarrett referred their perjury findings to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia last March. The office declined to pursue a criminal prosecution on Jan. 9. Schlozman served as a deputy, principal deputy, and acting head of the Civil Rights Division during the George W. Bush administration, and is presently of counsel at Hinkle Elkouri in Wichita, Kan. In a statement, Schlozman’s lawyer, William Jordan of Alston & Bird‘s Atlanta office, said the decision by the U.S. Attorney’s Office to drop the perjury investigation was evidence of the report’s bias and inaccuracy. What follows are some of the comments Schlozman made while a top official in the Justice Department. “I too get to work with mold spores, but here in Civil Rights, we call them Voting Section Attorneys,” Schlozman wrote in a July 2003 e-mail exchange with a former colleague. “My tentative plans are to gerrymander all of those crazy libs right out of the section.” Shanetta Cutlar, the Civil Division’s special litigation chief, told investigators that Schlozman minimized the importance of prior civil rights or human rights work when selecting front-runners for open positions. In this voicemail left for Cutlar in February 2006, Schlozman explains why that is: “[When] we start asking about, ‘what is your commitment to civil rights?’ … [H]ow do you prove that? Usually by membership in some crazy liberal organization or by some participation in some crazy cause. … Look, look at my resume — I didn’t have any demonstrated commitment, but I care about the issues. So, I mean, I just want to make sure we don’t start confining ourselves to, you know, politburo members because they happen to be a member of some, you know, psychopathic left-wing organization designed to overthrow the government.” In a July 2006 e-mail to Monica Goodling, then senior counsel to the attorney general and White House liaison, Schlozman puts in a good word for a friend who interviewed with Goodling for a political position. Schlozman references the division’s former principal deputy assistant attorney general, Sheldon Bradshaw, who is now a partner at Hunton & Williams: “I can assure you that [the applicant] is a good American. [The applicant] and Sheldon Bradshaw and I (and [one] other person) made up a four-member Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy at my former law firm.” In a June 2006 e-mail to a friend, Schlozman, then interim U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Missouri, compares his new job with his previous position in the Civil Rights Division:

It has been months since I felt the need to scream with a blood-curdling cry at some commie, partisan subordinate (i.e., most of the [Voting] section staff until recently). And I feel like the people I now work with are all complete professionals. What a weird change. Granted, these changes are nice in many respects, but bitch-slapping a bunch of [Division] attorneys really did get the blood pumping and was even enjoyable once in a while. I think now it’s all Good Cop for folks there. I much preferred the role of Bad Cop. … But perhaps the Division will name an award for me or something. How about the Brad Schlozman Award for Most Effectively Breaking the Will of Liberal Partisan Bureaucrats. I would be happy to come back for the awards ceremony.”

In January 2004, Schlozman declined then-deputy assistant attorney general Wan Kim’s invitation to have lunch in this e-mail: “Unfortunately I have an interview at 1 with some lefty who we’ll never hire but I’m extending a courtesy interview as a favor.” In March 2004, Schlozman e-mailed a counsel in the Civil Division’s front office to say that a Criminal Section deputy “has recommended several other commies for permanent positions in [the section]. [Criminal Section chief Albert Moskowitz] probably would concur with his recommendations. But as long as I’m here, adherents of Mao’s little red book need not apply.” A lawyer hired by Schlozman in the division e-mailed Schlozman shortly after his start date, writing that his “office is even next to a Federalist Society member.” Schlozman’s reply: “Just between you and me, we hired another member of ‘the team’ yesterday. And still another ideological comrade will be starting in one month. So we are making progress.” After reporting that she received unfavorable information from a judge she contacted while checking references for an Honors Program applicant who had clerked for two George W. Bush-appointed judges, Cutlar received this e-mail from Schlozman in December 2003: “Okay, but just remember, Republican judges are generally far more demanding of quality, accuracy, and faithful adherence to statute and constitutional text than liberals, for whom activism and advocacy are the hallmarks of acceptability.” A June 2004 e-mail sent by Schlozman to Federalist Society officials requests an invitation to a summer event, stating he would like to “use the event as a way to encourage some Federalist Society student members to apply to the Department of Justice as part of the Attorney General’s Honors Program.” According to the report, no similar requests to other organizations were found. Cutlar told investigators that Schlozman described an attorney he transferred out of the Appellate Section as “a Democrat in hiding,” someone who “wrote in Ebonics,” “was an idiot,” and “was an affirmative action thing.” In August 2004, Schlozman e-mailed then Voting Rights Section chief John Tanner to ask how Tanner liked his coffee. Tanner’s reply? “Mary Frances Berry style — black and bitter.” (Berry was the African-American chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from 1993 to 2004.) Schlozman forwarded the e-mail to several DOJ officials with the comment, “Y’all will appreciate Tanner’s response.” In sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee and in written responses to supplemental questions for the record, Schlozman said he did not politicize hiring at Justice. In September 2007, Schlozman supplied this written answer in reply to Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy’s question of whether Schlozman screened applicants for political allegiances: “With respect to ideology, I did not employ any sort of ideological litmus test. I sought instead to hire individuals who would vigorously enforce the laws under the Civil Rights Division’s jurisdiction, irrespective of their own political or ideological views.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.