Corbett Admin. Invokes New Black Panthers in Voter ID Letter to Justice Dept.
In late July, the U.S. Justice Department sent a letter to Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele noting it would be probing the state’s Voter ID laws—including the state’s erroneous claim that “99 percent of Pennsylvania’s eligible voters already have acceptable photo ID.” Yesterday, the state responded and sunk to new lows when it accused the feds of asking about their claims for political purposes and citing the 2008 New Black Panther case in Philly.
The letter from the governor’s administration—specifically, General Counsel James Schultz—is a 4-page screed full of denials, passive aggression and weird, twisted arguments that add up to the state deciding it’s not happy with the federal request for the state’s voter registration database, voter education information on the law and the state’s driver’s license database. And that the feds have no authority to request said information in the first place.
“Upon my initial review of your letter,” writes Schultz, “I was optimistic that surely your inquiry marked the long overdue renewal of the Department of Justice’s previously abandoned review of the 2008 voter intimidation case in Philly, a review that would be particularly well-timed in this presidential election year, as I trust Attorney General Holder and the Department of Justice share the Commonwealth’s commitment to ensuring that no violation of the voting rights of Pennsylvanians be tolerated.”
He continues: “My optimism proved unwarranted as I read your letter and learned that you are requesting information concerning [the Voter ID law].”
Schultz’s “long overdue” concerns took place on Election Day 2008, when a Republican operative filmed members of the New Black Panther party—a tiny, fringe group of black racists with no connection to the original 60s radical group—standing outside a polling place on Fairmount Avenue wearing military gear. One member held a nightstick. Voter intimidation was alleged and a small media firestorm erupted.
The next year, the U.S. Justice Department narrowed the case, focusing on the member of the duo who held the stick, claiming they didn’t have sufficient evidence to pursue the case against the other defendants. That claim enraged many on the right, including former Justice Department lawyer J. Christian Adams, who claimed those within the civil rights division in the U.S. Justice Department were only interested in protecting minorities. No witnesses could be produced who said the NBP actually intimidated or physically stopped anyone from voting, and the members involved were not sent to prison. This created even more right rage.
To figure the case out, the Dept. of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility offered a report in March 2011, which found nothing wrong with the way the case was handled. Contrary to Adams’ statements, which have been parroted by Internet commenters and Fox News hosts, the Dept. “did not commit professional misconduct or exercise poor judgment, but rather acted appropriately, in the exercise of their supervisory duties in connection with the dismissal of the three defendants in the NBPP case,” they found, after going through “thousands of pages of internal Department e-mails, memoranda, and notes.”
Many believed the entire case was a wild goose chase to bring down the Attorney General. “My fellow conservatives on the commission had this wild notion they could bring Eric Holder down and really damage the president,” noted Bush-appointed Commission on Civil Rights chair Abigail Thernstrom at the time. As Adam Serwer noted at the Washington Post, the case was “a colossal waste of time and taxpayer resources,” and a “a years-long journey into the fevered right-wing imagination.”
It didn’t end there. Rather, such a finding was oft-used to prove that the conspiracy within the Obama administration stretched further than anyone had previously believed, as seems to be the case with Schultz’s letter to the DOJ. Fox News, specifically its weird web aggregate Fox Nation, continues linking to stories about the New Black Panthers, giving them unwarranted legitimacy.
But whatever. The New Black Panther ordeal is just a sidebar in Schultz’s letter. The Administration has actually claimed the DOJ is overstepping its authority because of political opposition—and says all questions the feds have were already answered in last week’s state decision, where it was found that the law is compliant with the state constitution by the Commonwealth court, even though the DOJ’s request concerns federal, not state, law.
As noted by Talking Points Memo, Schultz specifically notes Pennsylvania is not covered by Section 5 of the VRA, which requires states with histories of racism and discrimination clear voting laws with the DOJ before moving forth. However, the DOJ is actually looking into Section 2 of the Act, which prohibits voting practices which discriminate based on race.
Schultz concludes, saying the state would be willing to provide the same documentation—even though the DOJ is playing politics—given the DOJ agrees to confidentiality. “You can appreciate our desire to ensure the professional handling of this confidential information,” the letter reads, “particularly here, where unlike the petitioners in the Commonwealth Court litigation, you are without authority to request or compel the production of the requested information.”
The DOJ has previously blocked Voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina.
The New Black Panthers have recently noted, according to Fox Nation, that at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, FL, “our feet will be on your motherfucking necks,” and when they get around to it, the group wants to kill white babies.




I have to agree with the state here. The whole New Black Panthers at the poll debacle was a national scandal to everyone BUT the Democrats.
If that is not enough evidence of problems at the polls that are sorted out by showing of ID among other reforms, then there was the ACORN scandal in Philly, and the Al Schmidt report.
Having confidence in the electoral process is MY right, and the Democrats don’t have the right to take that away.
Most voters agree with the state on this one.
When does the Corbett Administration deal with the proliferation of phony IDs used by underage drinkers, illegal persons in this state, and the ones obtained from corrupt Penndot employeess? This posturing by idiotic people on the taxpayers dime is disgraceful. The voter ID bill just validates that anyone with an ID can vote. What safeguards do they have at the polls to verify the validity of those IDs?
Also, where is the data that shows that it is an error that all PA citizens have one more more types of the ID that allows you to vote?
Remember that PennDOT ID is not the only form of ID you can use.
To address Constance, using a fake ID to vote is federal crime, and it leaves a trail of prosecutable evidence that is easier to go after than a mere signature. Also any election worker who lets a person vote is similarly at risk of prosecution. If a pattern of fake IDs in voting is observed, the penalties include heavy fines and jail time.
Philly RN, please tell me how having voters show ID is going to stop mooks like the NBP from showing up outside of polling places?
And first of all, ACORN never engaged in voter fraud–that is a fact. There was a problem with fraudulent registration form that some of their canvassers submitted–ACORN did the right thing and flagged them for review by election officials. Even if some fake registrations had gotten through, that’s a far cry from phony votes being cast.
Let’s face it: The only reason the Republicans pushed through voter ID was to suppress the urban, Democratic vote, and the only reason there isn’t more of an outcry is that a lot of suburbanites can’t conceive of someone not having a driver’s license or other ID–fact is there are people who don’t.