You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Race-obsessed Vanita Gupta should not be confirmed to Justice Department

Washington Examiner logo Washington Examiner 3/17/2021 Washington Examiner
Vanita Gupta looking at the camera © Provided by Washington Examiner

Ordinarily, senators should defer to the president on executive-branch appointments. But Justice Department nominee Anita Gupta is too radical to merit such deference.

Gupta, nominated by President Biden to be associate attorney general, is a radical on criminal justice and race. She has been an avid participant in the morally corrupt mutual back-scratching known as third-party settlements. She has made vicious partisan comments that give ample reason to believe she will politicize the Justice Department.

The third-ranking official at the DOJ has vast operational power behind the scenes, whereas his or her two superiors serve more as the public face of the administration.

Gupta began her legal career with direct funding from the left-wing Soros Foundation. For most of her career, she has demonstrated animus against police and evinces a conviction that this nation’s institutions, law enforcement and otherwise, are inherently racist. She advocates a huge role for the Department of Justice in interfering with local policing. She is asking for confirmation despite recent comments of a notably objectionable nature, despite having demanded rejection of judicial nominee Ryan Bounds for (mildly) “insensitive” comments he made against “multiculturalism” when he was a university student a full quarter of a century ago.

By the standard she applied to Bounds, Gupta clearly fails the test of reasonable nonpartisanship.

As the associate attorney general, Gupta would advise on matters relating to law enforcement and would oversee the Community Oriented Policing Services. Yet her antipathy toward criminal justice lives loudly within her. She supports an almost complete gutting of the 1994 federal “crime bill” that played a large role in reducing street crime. She has repeatedly said that almost all police departments are guilty of “institutional racism [that] has infected [them] at every level and stage of the game,” and she advocates significant reductions in police funding and the forced closure of numerous jails and prisons.

Gupta wants almost all bail requirements eliminated. She would abolish almost all mandatory minimum prison sentences, even for repeat offenders, and set a maximum criminal sentence, except in extremely rare circumstances, of 20 years.

If the only objections to Gupta involved her stances on criminal justice, one might yet defer to the president’s privilege of appointing people who share his policy preferences, even if they significantly contradict his own long record on those issues. Senators, perhaps, could give her the benefit of the doubt even on rather radical positions in just one area.

Yet Gupta is radical, truly radical, on racial issues. Just last summer, she testified to Congress that “structural racism is a feature of every American institution” and that every single American is guilty of “implicit bias,” especially regarding race. Indeed, she was so proud of making these accusations that she boasted about them in a series of tweets. Yet, piling evasion on top of her racial obsessions, she repeatedly equivocated last week when asked probing questions about these views by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas.

Gupta combines the worst sort of radical racial views with an antipathy toward law enforcement in a particularly objectionable way. In 2005, while already a major player in civil rights law, she wrote a law review article — a serious piece by a professional, not some off-the-cuff statement from a college kid — in which she argued for a widespread adoption of “critical race lawyering.” She described this overtly race-focused approach like this:

“Critical race theory, as an analytical tool, helps us understand that underneath the insidious veneer of such code words and mottos as ‘the rule of law,’ ‘colorblindness,’ 'equal justice for all,’ and ‘equal protection,’ the law is contingent upon the social and political realities of inequality and racial power.”

“The very systems” in place in this new millennium, she wrote, are responsible for “maintaining the subordination of people of color.”

This wasn’t in 1955, mind you, before Congress passed two civil rights acts. This wasn’t in 1974, when cities across the country broke out in major discord over forced busing. This was in modern-day America, after protections against racism and redress for racist actions had long been enshrined in law.

Equal justice under the law and legal colorblindness remain essential tenets of modern law and of what is and always should be the American experience. “Critical race theory” is a pernicious ideology that makes race the central consideration regarding everything in life. It should have no role in law enforcement, and its advocates, such as Gupta, certainly should not be given positions of power in the U.S. Justice Department.

Tags: Editorials, Critical Race Theory, Justice Department, Criminal Justice, Racism, Joe Biden, Attorney General

Original Author: Washington Examiner

Original Location: Race-obsessed Vanita Gupta should not be confirmed to Justice Department


More from Washington Examiner

Washington Examiner
Washington Examiner
image beaconimage beaconimage beacon