Earlier this month, the Senate refused to confirm President Obama’s nominee to head the Justice Department’s civil rights division. The nominee in question, Debo Adegbile, was considered controversial due to his role in the defense of, and his extra-curricular advocacy for, convicted cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal. The law enforcement community strongly opposed his nomination.
Republicans voted against Adegbile because of racism, obviously. That much is clear. Unfortunately for liberals, though, the situation is slightly more complicated, due to Senate Majority Harry Reid’s (D., Nev.) decision to nuke the filibuster for executive branch nominations. In the end, Adegbile was not confirmed because seven Democrats joined Republicans in voting no. Liberals aren’t mad, just disappointed at these Democrats who should know better, even if it's clear they’re not racist.
One of those seven Democrats, Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, has incurred the "profound disappointment" of students, faculty, and alumni at his alma mater, Yale Law School. More than 200 hundred of them have signed a letter urging the Senator to change his vote:
We write today to express our profound disappointment over your vote against Debo Adegbile for Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. We hope that should Mr. Adegbile’s nomination come before the Senate again, you will support him.
In your own words, there is "no question that Mr. Adegbile has had a significant and broad career as a leading civil rights advocate, and would be an asset to the Justice Department." Yet you voted against Mr. Adegbile. You did so citing the concerns of the law enforcement community about Mr. Adegbile’s work on a legal appeal for Mumia Abu-Jamal, a man convicted and sentenced to death 30 years ago for killing police officer Daniel Faulkner.
As students, professors and practitioners, your vote alarmed us. It signaled a lack of respect for the fundamental American legal principle that all parties have a right to zealous representation, and sent a message that young people considering public service careers should avoid work on behalf of unpopular or marginalized communities and clients.
The argument, which many on the left have been making, is that because convicted cop killers (Abu-Jamal was convicted decades before Adegbile joined his defense team) have a legal right to "zealous representation," the lawyers who provide this service have a concurrent right to a preeminent post in the U.S. Department of Justice.
Coons, at least, knows better. In a statement explaining his vote on Adegbile’s confirmation, the senator acknowledged that "as a lawyer, I understand the importance of having legal advocates willing to fight for even the most despicable clients." What Coons found so objectionable was "The decades-long public campaign by others…to elevate a heinous, cold-blooded killer to the status of a political prisoner and folk hero."
The disappointed Yalies do not even attempt to address the latter part of Coons’ statement. They simply quote his affirmation of Abu-Jamal’s right to a legal defense, and conclude that "We have trouble understanding your vote in light of these words."
They’re making the same mistake people often make in assuming the First Amendment gives everyone a right to free speech without consequences. When Martin Bashir lost his job after inviting his viewers to defecate in a woman’s mouth, no Constitutional principle was being violated. Nor was this the case when Helen Thomas was fired after saying Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and return to their homes in Germany and Poland, which they had fled for some reason.
The letter’s signatories appear particularly concerned with how the Adegbile nomination will affect their ability to get jobs in a future Democratic administration. Coons’ vote, they argue, "sends a disturbing message to young people considering careers in public service."
But their efforts to draw broader conclusions from the Abu-Jamal situation seem a bit overwrought. They note, for example, that Coons has advocated on behalf of "homeless families and Haitian refugees with HIV/AIDS," and suggest that his Adegbile vote is hypocritical because he failed to show support for other "marginalized communities," such as convicted cop killers backed by vocal public relations campaigns.
Adegbile’s defense of Abu-Jamal, the letter suggests, was just another example of Adegbile being a "tireless advocate for civil rights for the most vulnerable Americans." The Yalites lament the "tragic irony" of Adegbile being denied confirmation simply "because he has a history of leading civil rights."
The people who signed the letter are welcome their interpretation of the "principles and values" that Yale Law espouses, but shouldn’t get bent out of shape when our political system fails to endorse those values. Also, they should stop worrying. It seems highly unlikely that the Adegbile situation will significantly affect the number of six-figure legal positions in the Warren White House.