Jeff Sessions & David Shapiro & the Rule of Law
David Shapiro
David Shapiro’s  smear of Jeff Sessions in a Chicago Tribune op-ed  suggesting that the attorney general is a racist  is consistent with other failed partisan efforts to distort and delegitimize the former senator’s record on race and law enforcement. Apparently   Shapiro  missed Sessions’s confirmation hearing in which the same smears were attempted only to be refuted one by one by witnesses — mostly black — who actually know the facts and the man.
 Shapiro  asserts Sessions’s directive to staff on criminal sentencing related to drug crimes is “the latest in a series of attempts by the Attorney General to tear down protections for people of color.”  Mr. Shapiro  seems to have forgotten that during the height of the crack epidemic ravaging the black community in the ’80s  it was Congressman Charlie Rangel and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus who voted for the Anti-Drug Abuse Act (“ADAA”)  which established the 100-1 sentencing ratio for crack and powder cocaine. Were Rangel and other members of Congress racist?
The rest of  Shapiro ’s piece is character assassination of the worst kind. As U.S. attorney for Alabama  Sessions successfully sought the death penalty for Klan members.  He  defended black voting rights.  He  hired blacks for prominent positions. As a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights  I’ve known and worked with Jeff Sessions for years and consider him the most principled and decent person in Washington  a man of the highest integrity.
 Shapiro ’s complaint seems to be that Attorney General Sessions is actually doing  his  job — enforcing the law as Congress passed it. In contrast  former attorneys general Holder and Lynch  under the veil of “prosecutorial discretion ” failed to enforce the law. Select immigration and sentencing laws were simply ignored  virtually wholesale. That’s not the role of the attorney general  whether his name is Holder or Sessions. Such a sweeping use of prosecutorial discretion effectively nullifies or rewrites federal law. If drug laws need to be changed  Congress needs to change them. Holder’s and Lynch’s actions were a plain derogation  if not usurpation  of legislative authority. That Attorney General Sessions is being criticized for restoring both the rule of law and the Justice Department to their proper roles is an indication of how debased respect for the rule of law has become.
[TGT]’s  smear of Jeff Sessions in a Chicago Tribune op-ed  suggesting that the attorney general is a racist  is consistent with other failed partisan efforts to distort and delegitimize the former senator’s record on race and law enforcement. Apparently   Shapiro  missed Sessions’s confirmation hearing in which the same smears were attempted only to be refuted one by one by witnesses — mostly black — who actually know the facts and the man.
 Shapiro  asserts Sessions’s directive to staff on criminal sentencing related to drug crimes is “the latest in a series of attempts by the Attorney General to tear down protections for people of color.”  Mr. Shapiro  seems to have forgotten that during the height of the crack epidemic ravaging the black community in the ’80s  it was Congressman Charlie Rangel and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus who voted for the Anti-Drug Abuse Act (“ADAA”)  which established the 100-1 sentencing ratio for crack and powder cocaine. Were Rangel and other members of Congress racist?
The rest of  Shapiro ’s piece is character assassination of the worst kind. As U.S. attorney for Alabama  Sessions successfully sought the death penalty for Klan members.  He  defended black voting rights.  He  hired blacks for prominent positions. As a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights  I’ve known and worked with Jeff Sessions for years and consider him the most principled and decent person in Washington  a man of the highest integrity.
 Shapiro ’s complaint seems to be that Attorney General Sessions is actually doing  his  job — enforcing the law as Congress passed it. In contrast  former attorneys general Holder and Lynch  under the veil of “prosecutorial discretion ” failed to enforce the law. Select immigration and sentencing laws were simply ignored  virtually wholesale. That’s not the role of the attorney general  whether his name is Holder or Sessions. Such a sweeping use of prosecutorial discretion effectively nullifies or rewrites federal law. If drug laws need to be changed  Congress needs to change them. Holder’s and Lynch’s actions were a plain derogation  if not usurpation  of legislative authority. That Attorney General Sessions is being criticized for restoring both the rule of law and the Justice Department to their proper roles is an indication of how debased respect for the rule of law has become.