Merrick Garland's tenure as America's 86th Attorney General has sparked considerable debate, with critics labeling him as one of the most unconstitutional attorneys general in U.S. history. This perspective often draws parallels to A. Mitchell Palmer, our 50th, who served under President Warren G. Harding during the Red Scare of 1919-1920. Palmer’s notorious actions during this period offer a historical framework for analyzing Garland's approach to justice and civil liberties.
President Bill Clinton appointed Garland to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1997, and in 2013 he became the chief judge on the DC Circuit Court. In 2016 President Obama had nominated Garland to the Supreme Court, but 11 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican majority refused to conduct hearings necessary to advance the vote to the Senate at large, and Garland's nomination expired on January 3, 2017. Undeterred, Merrick Garland was nominated as Attorney General by President Joe Biden in March 2021 and approved by the US Senate by a vote of 70–30. With a distinguished background as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and previous experience in the Department of Justice, he was expected to bring moderation to a highly polarized political landscape. However, his tenure has faced criticism for perceived ‘weaponization’ of the department over critical issues like civil rights, voting rights, and the prosecution of former President Donald Trump and his associates.
Critics argue that Garland's zeal to take decisive actions against political adversaries and his hostile approach to civil rights issues undermine constitutional principles. By failing to address the January 6th prisoners, Garland neglected his constitutional duty to minster justice blindly. His critics contend that a failure to hold fair trials and extended incarcerations represented a significant deviation from his responsibilities.
To understand the criticisms directed at Garland, it is essential to examine A. Mitchell Palmer's actions during the Red Scare. Palmer became infamous for aggressively pursuing suspected radicals and communists, culminating in the Palmer Raids. These raids involved the arrest and deportation of thousands based on suspicion and political affiliation, often without due process. Many individuals were detained without proper warrants, violating the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Palmer justified his actions in the name of national security, but they led to significant civil liberties violations. His aggressive tactics highlighted the dangers of governmental overreach, with many detainees held under inhumane conditions. The backlash against Palmer's actions ultimately resulted in a reassessment of governmental authority and the protection of individual rights. Authority Garrland refused to extert toward illegal immigrants at a time of record numbers coming into America.
In contrast to Palmer’s overtly aggressive tactics, Garland’s approach has been characterized by inaction. Critics argue that this neglect has led to a failure to hold accountable those 'deep state' actors who may have orchestrated the events of January 6, 2021. While Palmer operated under the guise of national security and combating radicalism, Garland's inaction could be seen as a failure to protect democracy and uphold the rule of law.
For example, Garland's reluctance to halt state attorney generals’ charges against Donald Trump and his inner circle, including their lawyers. Critics argue that by not addressing potential legal violations, Garland risks normalizing behavior that undermines democratic institutions. This failure to act could set a dangerous precedent, reminiscent of how Palmer’s excesses prompted a backlash against governmental overreach.
Garland’s actions against parents, people of faith and pro life activists have sparked discussions about the balance of power and the role of the Attorney General in safeguarding civil liberties. Palmer’s raids were widely condemned as a violation of civil rights too leading to a public backlash that curtailed his influence. This historical example underscores the need for checks and balances in the pursuit of justice.
Garland faced the challenge of navigating a deeply polarized political landscape of the Biden Administration’s own making. His cautious approach and unwillingness to look inward may be interpreted as an attempt to avoid the pitfalls of overreach that characterized Palmer's tenure. However, this caution can also be seen as a failure to fulfill the Attorney General’s duty to uphold the Constitution vigorously. Critics contend that by not taking decisive action against those in his own justice department who threaten democratic norms, Garland risked enabling further erosion of civil liberties.
Public perception plays a crucial role in evaluating an Attorney General's effectiveness. Palmer’s actions were viewed through the lens of public panic, leading to widespread criticism and a reassessment of governmental authority. Similarly, Garland's perceived indecisiveness raises concerns about his commitment to responding adequately to threats against democracy.
The challenges faced by Garland highlight the delicate balance between enforcing the law, protecting civil liberties and partisinship in a politised agency that must remain neutral if democrat norms are to survive. As history illustrates, the actions of an Attorney General can have lasting implications for democracy. Critiques of Garland’s tenure offer an opportunity to reflect on the importance of accountability, justice, and the protection of constitutional rights amidst political pressures.
Ultimately, the legacies of both Palmer and Garland serve as reminders of the responsibilities that come with the office and the consequences of failing to uphold the principles enshrined in the Constitution. The ongoing discourse surrounding Garland's actions underscores the necessity of a vigilant and principled approach to the rule of law in the face of evolving political dynamics. The man or woman President elect Trump chooses for this post will be vital.
Editorial comments expressed in this column are the sole opinion of the writer.
