/PRNewswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today announced that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) for information regarding the DOJ's decision to file a lawsuit against Arizona over the state's tough new illegal immigration law, SB 1070. Judicial Watch seeks documents pertaining to the Obama administration's contacts with third party organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in making the decision to file the lawsuit.
Judicial Watch specifically seeks the following documents through its FOIA request originally filed on June 17, 2010:
Any and all communications between the Department of Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), concerning, regarding, or relating to Arizona's "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act," also referred to as "Arizona SB 1070."
Judicial Watch also seeks "any and all communications between the Department of Justice and any third parties," related to the SB 1070 lawsuit.
On May 17, 2010, a coalition of "civil rights groups," including the ACLU filed a class action lawsuit against the State of Arizona over SB 1070. According to the ACLU's press release announcing the lawsuit, this coalition included: "…the ACLU, MALDEF, National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), ACLU of Arizona, National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC) – a member of the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice."
"The American people ought to know if the Obama Justice Department is being run by radical leftist organizations such as the ACLU. I suspect that the Obama Justice Department is making decisions on behalf of its leftist allies, instead of in the public interest," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "This is a simple request for information. The Obama administration should stop stonewalling and release these basic documents on its decision to attack Arizona over its get-tough illegal immigration law."
Judicial Watch represents Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, author of SB 1070, in the Obama administration's lawsuit challenging the Arizona law. Visit www.JudicialWatch.org to access Judicial Watch's FOIA lawsuit against the Obama Justice Department.
-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP
Showing posts with label FOIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FOIA. Show all posts
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Documents Detailing White House Involvement in Black Panther Case Dismissal
/PRNewswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today announced that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v Department of Justice (CV 10-01606)) against the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) to obtain records related to meetings between Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli and White House officials regarding DOJ's decision to dismiss its voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense (NBPP). Judicial Watch seeks the following documents through its FOIA request sent on January 19, 2010:
"Any and all records of Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli concerning meetings with the White House on the Justice Department's voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. The time frame for this request is from January 20, 2009 to June 15, 2009."
On March 26, 2010, the DOJ informed Judicial Watch that it had conducted a search for documents, but found "no records responsive to your request." Judicial Watch appealed the decision on March 31, 2010, based on "various media accounts in which it was reported that Associate Attorney General Perrelli visited the White House on nine occasions between March 25, 2009, and May 27, 2009, to discuss Defendant's voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party."
The DOJ was required to make a determination on Judicial Watch's appeal within 20 working days, or by May 3, 2010. To date, no such determination has been made.
On September 20, Judicial Watch released a draft Vaughn index from the DOJ pursuant to a separate lawsuit indicating that Perrelli and other top political appointees were involved in the decision to dismiss the Black Panther case despite sworn testimony of Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, to the contrary.
The Vaughn index (privilege log) produced to Judicial Watch describes documents that continue to be withheld by the Justice Department. The index details 122 documents (totaling at least 611 pages) that the Obama DOJ is withholding from the public in their entirety. A federal court hearing in the matter is scheduled on October 5, 2010, in Washington, DC, before U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton.
"Why should anyone believe the Justice Department's story regarding these records? We now know Justice officials falsely stated that no political appointees were involved in the Black Panther decision. The Justice Department continues to withhold hundreds of pages of records that could shed light on this scandal. And despite multiple press reports documenting Perrelli's White House meetings, the Justice Department cannot find a single record related to these meetings. We're tired of getting the run-around and that's why we sued," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The DOJ filed its lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party following an incident that took place outside of a Philadelphia polling station on November 4, 2008. A video of the incident, showing a member of the New Black Panther Party brandishing police-style baton weapon, was widely distributed on the Internet. According to multiple witnesses, members of the New Black Panthers blocked access to polling stations, harassed voters and hurled racial epithets. Nonetheless, the DOJ ultimately overruled the recommendations of its own staff and dismissed the majority of its charges.
-----
Community News You Can Use
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"Any and all records of Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli concerning meetings with the White House on the Justice Department's voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. The time frame for this request is from January 20, 2009 to June 15, 2009."
On March 26, 2010, the DOJ informed Judicial Watch that it had conducted a search for documents, but found "no records responsive to your request." Judicial Watch appealed the decision on March 31, 2010, based on "various media accounts in which it was reported that Associate Attorney General Perrelli visited the White House on nine occasions between March 25, 2009, and May 27, 2009, to discuss Defendant's voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party."
The DOJ was required to make a determination on Judicial Watch's appeal within 20 working days, or by May 3, 2010. To date, no such determination has been made.
On September 20, Judicial Watch released a draft Vaughn index from the DOJ pursuant to a separate lawsuit indicating that Perrelli and other top political appointees were involved in the decision to dismiss the Black Panther case despite sworn testimony of Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, to the contrary.
The Vaughn index (privilege log) produced to Judicial Watch describes documents that continue to be withheld by the Justice Department. The index details 122 documents (totaling at least 611 pages) that the Obama DOJ is withholding from the public in their entirety. A federal court hearing in the matter is scheduled on October 5, 2010, in Washington, DC, before U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton.
"Why should anyone believe the Justice Department's story regarding these records? We now know Justice officials falsely stated that no political appointees were involved in the Black Panther decision. The Justice Department continues to withhold hundreds of pages of records that could shed light on this scandal. And despite multiple press reports documenting Perrelli's White House meetings, the Justice Department cannot find a single record related to these meetings. We're tired of getting the run-around and that's why we sued," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The DOJ filed its lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party following an incident that took place outside of a Philadelphia polling station on November 4, 2008. A video of the incident, showing a member of the New Black Panther Party brandishing police-style baton weapon, was widely distributed on the Internet. According to multiple witnesses, members of the New Black Panthers blocked access to polling stations, harassed voters and hurled racial epithets. Nonetheless, the DOJ ultimately overruled the recommendations of its own staff and dismissed the majority of its charges.
-----
Community News You Can Use
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit against HUD to Obtain ACORN Documents Seeks Records Related to HUD's Taxpayer Support
Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit against HUD to Obtain ACORN Documents
Seeks Records Related to HUD's Taxpayer Support of Controversial Community Organization
/Standard Newswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to obtain records related to federal grants provided to the controversial "community organization" Association for Community Reform Now (ACORN).
Judicial Watch filed its original Freedom of Information Act request on July 17. HUD acknowledged receipt of the request by letter on August 4th and granted itself additional time to process the request. However, HUD has not abided by its own extended deadline and has failed to provide Judicial Watch with a specific date by which it would respond, even after Judicial Watch agreed to limit the scope of the request to just seven states. (These states are California, Texas, Washington, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, and Louisiana.) By law, HUD had 20 days to respond to Judicial Watch's request. Judicial Watch filed its lawsuit on September 23, 2009.
Judicial Watch seeks the following records:
1. Any and all documents concerning money given to the ACORN and/or any of its affiliates (since January, 2000).
2. Any and all documents concerning any actions and/or disbarments against ACORN, for reasons including but not limited to abuse of grant money, misconduct, etc. (since January, 2000).
Over the last two weeks, the U.S. Senate has voted to deny ACORN access to housing funds, while the House of Representatives voted to deny ACORN all federal funds. The U.S. Census Bureau, meanwhile, has severed its partnership with the organization for the 2010 U.S. Census. The IRS also just severed a program relationship with ACORN. These actions were taken after videos surfaced depicting ACORN workers attempting to advise undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration and child prostitution laws. Most relevant to the lawsuit against HUD, are the videos depicting ACORN workers providing advice on purchasing a house to run as a brothel for underage, illegal alien girls.
"The Obama administration needs to come clean to the American people about its relationship with this disgraced organization, especially in light of President Obama's personal connections to ACORN," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Given ACORN's scandalous record, the federal government has no business supporting the organization with taxpayer dollars. It is troubling, given President Obama's promises of transparency, we have had to sue to try to gain access to the ACORN documents."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Seeks Records Related to HUD's Taxpayer Support of Controversial Community Organization
/Standard Newswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to obtain records related to federal grants provided to the controversial "community organization" Association for Community Reform Now (ACORN).
Judicial Watch filed its original Freedom of Information Act request on July 17. HUD acknowledged receipt of the request by letter on August 4th and granted itself additional time to process the request. However, HUD has not abided by its own extended deadline and has failed to provide Judicial Watch with a specific date by which it would respond, even after Judicial Watch agreed to limit the scope of the request to just seven states. (These states are California, Texas, Washington, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, and Louisiana.) By law, HUD had 20 days to respond to Judicial Watch's request. Judicial Watch filed its lawsuit on September 23, 2009.
Judicial Watch seeks the following records:
1. Any and all documents concerning money given to the ACORN and/or any of its affiliates (since January, 2000).
2. Any and all documents concerning any actions and/or disbarments against ACORN, for reasons including but not limited to abuse of grant money, misconduct, etc. (since January, 2000).
Over the last two weeks, the U.S. Senate has voted to deny ACORN access to housing funds, while the House of Representatives voted to deny ACORN all federal funds. The U.S. Census Bureau, meanwhile, has severed its partnership with the organization for the 2010 U.S. Census. The IRS also just severed a program relationship with ACORN. These actions were taken after videos surfaced depicting ACORN workers attempting to advise undercover reporters on how to evade tax, immigration and child prostitution laws. Most relevant to the lawsuit against HUD, are the videos depicting ACORN workers providing advice on purchasing a house to run as a brothel for underage, illegal alien girls.
"The Obama administration needs to come clean to the American people about its relationship with this disgraced organization, especially in light of President Obama's personal connections to ACORN," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Given ACORN's scandalous record, the federal government has no business supporting the organization with taxpayer dollars. It is troubling, given President Obama's promises of transparency, we have had to sue to try to gain access to the ACORN documents."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)