Merrick Garland Has a History of Refusing to Address Discriminatory Conduct In His District. The CLC request to testify in Garland's Senate Confirmation Hearing.
Newark, New Jersey Jan 29, 2021 (Issuewire.com) - The Senate Judiciary Committee
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 201510
Dear Chairperson,
We write to request an opportunity to testify at the Committee hearing for the confirmation of the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland as the Attorney General of the United States. The Color of Law Center strongly opposes the nomination of Judge Garland to be Attorney General of the United States of America and we would appreciate the opportunity to inform the Committee as to the events we are aware of which substantiate our opposition. The information we are in possession of demonstrates that Judge Garland would be a threat to the Civil rights of marginalized Americans.
As I am sure the Committee is aware, the Attorney General serves as the head of the Department of Justice. Being at the helm of the United States Justice System is a position which determines policies and directives essential to the enforcement of the Constitutional rights of all Americans. As Equal protection under the law is a constitutional right, an individual with a demonstrated stance of neglecting to enforce this right for marginalized Americans challenges the very purpose of the Department of Justice.
During his tenure as Chief Judge in the District of Columbia, Judge Garland's role included overseeing the investigation of judicial misconduct complaints. The applicable standard for conducting a judicial misconduct investigation includes interviewing witnesses, reviewing documents, and gathering any other information necessary to ascertain the validity of the complaint. The Color of Law Center has maintained, in confidence, first hand accounts of African American litigants who lodged judicial misconduct complaints due to discriminatory
treatment. Each litigant had their complaints disposed of with no cognizable investigation and no action taken to rectify the referenced conduct. Garland dismissed each complaint citing that there was no pattern of discrimination, despite the complaints allegeing similar conduct by the same judge (Judge Richard Leon) aimed at the same group of people (African Americans). These complaints established over-arching similarities which demonstrated the exact definition of a pattern.
The Code of Conduct for the United States Judiciary requires that each member of the judiciary "maintain and enforce high standards of conduct." Canon 1, P. 2. Judges are not only to avoid impropriety, they are to avoid the very "appearance of impropriety." Canon 2, P.3. It stands to reason that the disposition of discrimination complaints without commensurable investigation does not promote high standards and creates an appearance of impropriety. Taking into consideration that Judge Garland failed to uphold the code of conduct as a Judge, he cannot reasonably be expected to uphold the Constitution as Attorney General.
We submit that our testimony regarding Judge Garland's conduct as Chief Judge would provide essential context for the consideration of his confirmation as Attorney General.
Kind regards,
Phylicia D.C. Pearson, Esq.
General Counsel Color of Law Center
https://www.coloroflawcenter.org/merrickgarland
Media Contact
Color of Law Center - Foundation
(973) 353-8404
One Gateway Center set 2600 Newark, NJ 07102
Source :Color of Law Center
This article was originally published by IssueWire. Read the original article here.
