Report Uncovers Illegal Hiring Practices within the Justice Department
Feature Story from Civilrights.org
Alexander Botting
August 18, 2008
The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on July 30 to discuss whether political ideology was used, illegally, by Bush administration officials as a "litmus test" when hiring people for career (civil service) positions within the Justice Department.
The hearing took place just days after the release of a report from the department's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), highlighting hiring practices within the department which violated both federal law and department policy.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, characterized the report's findings, released on July 28, as, "the biggest threat to the effectiveness, professionalism and independence of the department since Watergate."
According to the report, an investigation into the roles of former Justice Department officials Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson in the illegal hiring methods came about after Goodling testified to the House Judiciary Committee on May 23, 2007, admitting that "in some cases I learned and considered political information" when screening candidates for career attorney positions within the department.
The report outlines several instances where Goodling and Sampson, as well as other Bush administration officials, used political or ideological affiliations as factors in the job candidate screening process.
In his testimony to the committee, Glenn A. Fine, inspector general for the Justice Department, highlighted an example in which an experienced terrorism prosecutor was rejected by Goodling for a position working on counterterrorism issues because of his wife's political affiliations, and a less qualified candidate without counterterrorism experience was chosen instead.
Fine went on to say that the most common use of these improper practices was in the selection of immigration judges. He also said that delays caused by Goodling and Sampson's screening methods "increased the burden on the immigration courts, which already were experiencing an increased workload and a high vacancy rate."
Although current Justice Department officials who participated in illegal hiring practices may face sanctions by the department, Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently announced that he did not plan to bring criminal charges in the matter. Since Goodling and Sampson no longer work at the Justice Department, they can not be sanctioned.
Civil rights groups are eagerly awaiting the release of a third OIG/OPR report, which is expected to highlight a large amount of corruption within the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.
The report, which is expected by the end of the current congressional session in September, will investigate allegations that Bradley Schlozman, former Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division, and others in the division, used similar methods for hiring decisions.
The Washington Post reported last year that during testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Schlozman had "boasted of hiring Republicans and Conservatives [to the Civil Rights Division]."
The Post also anonymously quoted a division employee who said of Schlozman's testimony, "When he said he didn't engage in political hiring, most of us thought that was just laughable."
While the release of the new report will highlight any unlawful hiring practices that have taken place in the Civil Rights Division in the past, it will fall to the next president's administration to make sure that similar incidents do not occur in the future.
Julie Fernandes, former counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, said that, "This is a wake-up call to all of us about the need for transparency and vigorous oversight of career personnel decisions, from top to bottom. When law enforcement is driven by ideology rather than facts, we all lose."
