[EL] Curious double election law issues in investigation of IRS targeting

[John Tanner]

Peccavi

I stand corrected on 2 points.  As usual, I have mixed up names and people,
so I was thinking of a different Barbara something-or-other.  I can't place
the "real" Barbara Bosserman but am confident that she is also very capable
and honorable.

And I hear that nowadays only Main Justice prosecutors are prohibited by
Reg. from making campaign contributions.

My information is from way back in Ms Reno's time -- although I'm not sure
if it was a reg or a ukase (which are far more common) when all criminal
prosecutors were affected.   I don't really know if they lifted the non-Reg
policy


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:26 PM, John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com>wrote:

> I know and like Ms. Bosserman, aka Bobbie, and there's no at all reason to
> doubt her ability or integrity.   I think she actually works or used to
> work in an office that advises attorneys about the rules of various state
> bars so attorneys can stay out of trouble.   I have no problem at all with
> her assignment.
>
> But it's an odd choice.  The usual candidates for such a task are AUSAs
> and Main Justice criminal prosecutors, all of who are (or at least used to
> be) prohibited from making campaign contributions because of the appearance
> issue.  The appearance issue, as to which I'm pretty sure there's an actual
> Reg., allows consideration of that sort of thing in making assignments.  It
> seems like one of the OPR people looking into the New Black Panther
> business was pulled because of contributions, but I may be wrong.
>
> (While an attorney in the Voting Section I personally avoided making any
> campaign contributions, but I'd have to admit that was largely because I
> knew a whole lot of candidates and liked to have an easy reason to say
> "No.")
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Trevor Potter <tpotter at capdale.com>wrote:
>
>>  If it is in fact against the law or department regulations to deny a
>> civil service employee a position or responsibility based on their
>> political contributions (I do not know that to be the case in fact, but am
>> reacting to the post) that would seem a sensible protection of political
>> speech in a governmental setting, and would likely be designed to avoid
>> reprisals for political views discovered through mandated disclosure.
>>
>>
>>
>> Trevor Potter
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
>> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of *Scarberry,
>> Mark
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 10, 2014 2:57 PM
>> *To:* law-election at UCI.edu
>> *Subject:* [EL] Curious double election law issues in investigation of
>> IRS targeting
>>
>>
>>
>> Legally mandated campaign contribution disclosures reveal that the DOJ
>> Civil Rights Division attorney tasked with investigating the IRS targeting
>> of certain 501(c)(4) applicants made multiple contributions to the Obama
>> campaigns and the DNC. Thus, there are allegations of bias and conflict of
>> interest. See, for example,
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2014/01/09/obama-political-donor-leading-justice-departments-irs-investigation/,
>> and the letter from Representatives Issa and Jordan to Attorney General
>> Holder,
>> http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/2014-01-08-DEI-Jordan-to-Holder-DOJ-IRS-tax-exempt-applicants.pdf.
>> Yet we are told (in the same Wash. Post article) that the Justice
>> Department could not take such contributions into account in deciding
>> whether to assign that task to her:
>>
>>
>>
>> “It is contrary to department policy and a prohibited personnel practice
>> under federal law to consider the political affiliation of career employees
>> or other non-merit factors in making personnel decisions,” DOJ spokeswoman
>> Dena Iverson said in a statement. “Additionally, removing a career employee
>> from an investigation or case due to political affiliation, as Chairmen
>> Issa and Jordan have requested, could also violate the equal opportunity
>> policy and the law.”
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the government actually prohibited from reviewing campaign
>> contribution disclosures in this way, or taking into account the appearance
>> of bias or conflict of interest potentially revealed by such disclosures,
>> when the investigation is politically charged? What might this tell us
>> about the propriety (pro or con) of requiring disclosure of contributions
>> by government officials or others?
>>
>>
>>
>> Just to make clear, I don’t know anything about the attorney (Barbara
>> Bosserman), other than what I’ve read in the press, and am not accusing her
>> of bias in this matter.
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought it was curious that an election law matter – the targeting of
>> groups allegedly because of their expected participation in electoral
>> politics – would trigger another election law issue, the proper use of
>> mandated campaign contribution disclosures.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark S. Scarberry
>>
>> Professor of Law
>>
>> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you
>> that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in
>> this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written
>> to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related
>> penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
>> recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.
>>
>>  This message is for the use of the intended recipient only. It is from a
>> law firm and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
>> If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure, copying, future
>> distribution, or use of this communication is prohibited. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please advise us by return e-mail, or
>> if you have received this communication by fax advise us by telephone and
>> delete/destroy the document.
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140110/14f5be3a/attachment.html>