The Justice Department cites a newspaper article to attack Florida

How flimsy is the Holder Justice Department’s desperate bid to halt Florida’s effort to clear illegal voters from its rolls?  J. Christian Adams writes at Pajamas Media that DOJ actually cited speculation from a newspaper article as part of its argument.

At issue is the absurd Justice argument that an effort to cleanse illegal immigrants from the rolls is racially discriminatory, because it would disproportionately affect immigrants.  This is the ultimate logical nullity, amounting to an official decree that reality must be ignored, and common sense utterly suspended, in favor of an ideological fantasy land.

A great proportion of the illegitimate voters Florida has discovered – and it’s isolated over a hundred of them so far – are illegal immigrants from South America.  It is comically absurd to suggest that Florida should tolerate them as illegally registered voters indefinitely, unless it can scrounge up a suitable offsetting number of illegal immigrant voters from other racial backgrounds.

At least 50 of the illegitimate voters discovered by the state of Florida have actually voted illegally in the past.  Those are felony offenses, but the so-called “Justice Department” appears to be serenely unconcerned about them, or the fifty legitimate voters – just for fun, let’s call it fifty legitimate black voters – who were disenfranchised by these illegal ballots.  Instead, the radicals who have taken over Justice apparently think Florida needs to tolerate those illegal votes without complaint, until they can produce a balancing quantity of illegitimate British, German, or French voters.

The state of Florida responded to the Justice Department’s accusation of disproportionate racial impact by pointing out that “any program that removes non-citizens from the rolls in Florida, even if 100% accurate, will undoubtedly have this result.  But DOJ cannot and does not argue that the accurate removal of non-citizens has any impermissible disparate impact.”  In other words, this is the same tired, nonsensical argument advanced against rational voter ID laws.  No legal assertion of malevolent racist or partisan intention is made, although vote-fraud defenders are very energetic about throwing around such allegations in the court of public opinion.  Instead, the process is deemed unacceptable if it merely affects preferred racial groups in a “disproportionate” manner… even though the most cursory observation of objective reality reveals those groups make up a “disproportionate” share of the illegitimate voters.

It’s also silly to lump all of the affected individuals together as a “Hispanic” or “minority” population.  Florida’s Hispanic immigrant population comes from a variety of different national backgrounds, as the Left will be only too happy to admit when the discussion turns to Cuban-Americans.  Liberals are the ones who insist on primitive racial classifications that lump them all together.  Then they project their racism onto others, and charge them with the crime of seeing people the way liberals do.

Where does the Justice Department get its idea that Florida’s purge of illegal voters might be “discriminatory?”  Why, they read it in a newspaper article!

As Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner points out in his memo to U.S. District Court, the Justice Department cited a single source to support its claim of racial discrimination: “a news report ‘indicat[ing] that the program may have a disproportionate impact on minority voters’ because ‘87 percent of those on the 2,600-person list are minorities.’”  (Emphasis mine.)

Detzner asserts that using mere speculation from a single media report “is obviously not competent evidence to support any judgment or relief.”

J. Christian Adams concurs: “During the Bush administration, such evidentiary nonsense would not have occurred.  The voting section chiefs at the time would never tolerate such flimsy lawyering.  In fact, current section chief Chris Herren would not have supported such flimsy lawyering before January 20, 2009.  But with radicals in power, the rules of evidence matter less than the exercise of power to achieve politically transformational ends.  It is the story as old as time, the sacrifice of principle in the quest for power or the favor of superiors.”

“Unfortunately for the nation, and the Rule of Law,” Adams concludes, “principles are in short supply in Holder’s corrupted Department of Justice.”  It’s just one more example of the Obama Administration’s urge to impose ideology upon stubborn reality.  Inconvenient truth is resolutely ignored… or, even worse, altered through raw political force, as with the “green energy” debacle or Operation Fast and Furious.

Sadly, this heavily politicized “Justice” Department is now primarily concerned with protecting the violators of American voting and immigration laws, while taking decisive action against those who would enforce them.