The Politics of Justice

February 16, 2010  |  Posted by Danielle Belton

In Friday's Washington Post, the Obama Administration and the Department of Justice appeared to be scrambling as they tried to deal with the negative political fallout from the decision to finally try 9/11 terror suspect, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, as well as four others, in New York City. A fallout pushed by many Republicans and conservatives despite the fact that the Bush Administration had also tried terrorism suspects in US courts.

Now the president is becoming personally involved in selecting where the trials will be held. Why would he get that deep in the details, you ask?

From the Washington Post:

At first blush, the choice of New York made sense to many lawyers inside and outside of the administration: Judges and prosecutors there have handled serious national security trials, the Manhattan courthouse and tunneled detention complex would not require any of the suspects to move aboveground, and security costs would be lower than building a new facility.

But several sources questioned why the administration -- especially one replete with political veterans -- has not done a better job of managing the complex politics of national security.

"How did this happen?" asked Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.). "It was being blind to political realities." (Emphasis mine)

The problem here is that the DOJ looked at the terror trials from the view of -- shock, shock -- prosecutors and law enforcement officials. They were simply doing what they'd always done -- try to bring people to justice and then deliver that justice to victims.

But that apolitical decision was blind to Peter King’s politicization of our national security.

You see, it's not about doing the "right" thing. It doesn't matter that civil courts have more experience trying terrorists, or that the Bush Administration touted their successful prosecution of over 300 terrorists in their last DOJ budget request. No, it's about how people "feel." It's about emotion, not rationality. It's about politics, not priorities.

Republicans want to know why Holder and the President didn't consider what their political reaction would be. But maybe Holder and Obama didn't think right wing Republicans would stoop so low as to attack the rule of law and the DOJ's stellar reputation for successfully prosecuting terrorists. Maybe they didn't think these Chicken Little Hawks would attack the Obama Administration for doing something the Bush Administration did hundreds of times over -- try and convict terrorists in civil court.

Well, lesson learned, by Obama and the American people. Here’s the political reality - some conservatives aren’t above politicizing national security to win votes in the fall. Just ask Sen. Mitch McConnell.

New Security Action is tired of the games, and we’re doing something about it. Click HERE to join us and put Republicans like Peter King and Mitch McConnell on notice - when Republicans play games with our national security, it puts our nation at risk.

blog comments powered by Disqus