We're not in Kansas anymore, are we?

A report from the inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility at the Justice Department, says The NY Times, found that a former senior official at the Justice Department, Bradley Schlozman, "selected conservative lawyers for prime assignments and transferred three lawyers out of the Civil Rights Division because they were seen as liberals who were opposed to his political agenda. All three later brought federal discrimination claims and returned to the division after Mr. Schlozman left. The transfers, the report found, violated federal civil service law and 'constituted misconduct.'

"The investigation found that among people hired by Mr. Schlozman, 63 of 65 were considered Republican or conservative, but that when he was not involved, 'the results were more balanced,' with conservatives and liberals split about evenly.

"In a 2003 voice-mail message to a colleague, Mr. Schlozman said experience in civil rights law was not needed to work for the division. 'I just want to make sure we don’t start confining ourselves to, you know, Politburo members because they happen to be a member of some, you know, psychopathic left-wing organization designed to overthrow the government,' he said." (It's amazing how conservatives embrace affirmative action if it applies only to conservatives - see my previous post.)

"The investigators for the inspector general and the Office of Professional Responsibility concluded that Mr. Schlozman’s repeated denials to the Senate in 2007 that he had used ideological considerations in his personnel decisions constituted a 'false statement,' and they referred the matter to prosecutors for criminal prosecution last year."

The United States Attorney’s Office, headed by a Bush appointee, declined to prosecute. Mr. Schlozman is happily practicing law in his native Kansas.

Conservatives favor affirmative action for conservatives.

Yes, the proof is in. The report of the Justice Department Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility concludes that for at least five years, two Bush appointed Attorneys General illegally applied ideological and political litmus tests to civil service hiring for intern and career attorney positions. Applications to the Justice Department's Honors Program, which seeks the best talent from top law schools, were scrutinized for telltale signs of liberal affiliation, such as "buzzwords" like "social justice," or volunteer work for organizations perceived to have liberal goals.

In spite of the fact that the purpose of the civil service system is to keep politics out of the hiring process, a former spokesperson for Attorney General John Ashcroft. quoted on NPR, justified the illegal practice as a long overdue attempt to create ideological diversity in the Justice Department! Given that candidates with perceived liberal affiliations or leanings were rejected at three times the rate of those believed to be conservative, that means that standards were lowered in order to accommodate a particular subset of applicants- just as conservatives bitterly complained affirmative action programs did in the sixties and seventies. This seems to be a tacit admission by the Bush Justice Department that conservatives are not as bright and academically accomplished as liberals. A former justice department official said the policy meant that Justice was hiring from the B list instead of the A list.

Is it any surprise that during this time the Justice Department did not seek racial and ethnic diversity in its hiring? Not a single black lawyer was hired in the Civil Rights Division between 2003 and 2007.

Update: The Justice Department’s inspector general and its internal ethics office issued a report concluding that aides to Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales illegally used partisan and ideological criteria to select less-qualified applicants for nonpolitical senior career positions, including immigration judges, assistant United States attorneys and counterterrorism positions. This discrimination slowed the hiring process at critical times and damaged the department’s credibility. Applicants' views on "God, guns and gays" were a key part of the screening.