Earlier this month, the Department of Justice released a report on the hiring practices of the former head of its Civil Rights Division by the DOJ Inspector General Glenn Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief H. Marshall Jarrett.
It says that the former head of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, Bradley Schlozman, routinely violated federal law and department policy by using political and ideological affiliations in hiring several career attorneys.
Schlozman regularly labeled job applicants as good or bad American based on their political leanings or his perceptions of whether they were liberal or conservative. He favored applicants with conservative political or ideological affiliations and disfavored applicants with civil rights or human rights experience whom he considered to be overly liberal. Remember this is the CIVIL RIGHTS Division.
Former Criminal Section Chief Moskowitz told investigators that “the candidates for career positions chosen by Schlozman had conservative political or ideological affiliations and rarely had any civil rights background, rarely expressed any interest in civil rights enforcement, and had very little or no federal criminal experience.”
Special Litigation Section Chief Shanetta Cutlar was supervised by Schlozman.
In the report:
Cutlar said she vehemently objected to some of the candidates interviewed for the Special Litigation Section because she did not believe they were qualified, but said she was routinely overruled by Schlozman.
For example, Cutlar said she objected to hiring a candidate who was the girlfriend of an attorney hired in the Division’s Educational Opportunities Section because the applicant was unqualified. The applicant, who was working as a contract paralegal at a law firm, was a member of both the Federalist Society and the Republican National Lawyers Association.
Cutlar said she also noted a discrepancy in dates on the applicant’s résumé – specifically that during the period the applicant claimed to have been self-employed practicing law, she was not admitted to any state bar. When Cutlar sought an explanation from the applicant during the interview, Schlozman told her to “let it go.â€
Cutlar argued with Schlozman after the interview that the candidate had not been truthful and should not be hired. By the time she returned to her office, however, Cutlar had received an e-mail from Schlozman informing her that he was hiring the applicant.
The applicant resigned her position at the Department before the end of her first year when faced with possible termination for poor performance.
There is much more in the 70-page report. Read here.