The United States Commission on Civil Rights transmits this report, Race Neutral Enforcement
of the Law? DOJ and the New Black Panther Party Litigation: An Interim Report, pursuant to
Public Law 103-419. The purpose of the report is to examine the U.S. Department of Justice’s
(“DOJ” or “the Department”) legal and policy rationales for dismissing a civil voter intimidation
lawsuit against three of four defendants and reducing the relief requested against the fourth,
despite the case being in default. Based upon the incomplete, incorrect and changing explanations
offered by the Department for its actions, the Commission decided to examine whether the U.S.
Department of Justice enforced voting rights in a race-neutral manner when it reversed course in
the New Black Panther Party case.
The case stemmed from an incident that occurred in Philadelphia during the 2008 presidential
election in which two New Black Panther Party members stood in the entrance to a polling place
in full paramilitary garb and shouted racial slurs. One of the two brandished a nightstick. In
December 2008, a civil case for alleged Voting Rights Act violations for intimidating or
attempting to intimidate voters, poll workers and observers was initiated against the NBPP, its
chairman, and the two men at the polling place. Despite the entry of a default in DOJ’s favor
against each of the defendants, in May 2009 the Department abruptly reversed course and
dismissed charges against all but one of the defendants and reduced the original sanctions it
requested against the remaining defendant, who was only enjoined from carrying a weapon at a
polling place in Philadelphia until 2012.
of the Law? DOJ and the New Black Panther Party Litigation: An Interim Report, pursuant to
Public Law 103-419. The purpose of the report is to examine the U.S. Department of Justice’s
(“DOJ” or “the Department”) legal and policy rationales for dismissing a civil voter intimidation
lawsuit against three of four defendants and reducing the relief requested against the fourth,
despite the case being in default. Based upon the incomplete, incorrect and changing explanations
offered by the Department for its actions, the Commission decided to examine whether the U.S.
Department of Justice enforced voting rights in a race-neutral manner when it reversed course in
the New Black Panther Party case.
The case stemmed from an incident that occurred in Philadelphia during the 2008 presidential
election in which two New Black Panther Party members stood in the entrance to a polling place
in full paramilitary garb and shouted racial slurs. One of the two brandished a nightstick. In
December 2008, a civil case for alleged Voting Rights Act violations for intimidating or
attempting to intimidate voters, poll workers and observers was initiated against the NBPP, its
chairman, and the two men at the polling place. Despite the entry of a default in DOJ’s favor
against each of the defendants, in May 2009 the Department abruptly reversed course and
dismissed charges against all but one of the defendants and reduced the original sanctions it
requested against the remaining defendant, who was only enjoined from carrying a weapon at a
polling place in Philadelphia until 2012.
