Don’t Sacrifice Bill Lann Lee to Politics

The uncertainty in the nomination of Bill Lann Lee as our nation’s top enforcement officer in the civil rights division of the Department of Justice represents the kind of public sacrifice we should never be forced to make. We stand to lose one of our most gifted, highly qualified and deserving nominations to political gamesmanship. The refusal to send Lee’s name forward to the full Senate for a confirmation vote belies the truly disturbing fact that the Republican leadership in Congress believes that educational qualifications, professional experience, personal integrity and dedication to principles of equality and justice are simply not enough.

While we have had capable leadership in the past, Lee would bring a new dimension to the office he seeks. Traditionally, this post has been filled by an African American, and it is uncommon for an Asian American candidate to have the kind of strong civil rights and administrative background that Lee possesses. Lee is of Chinese descent, entering public service during a period of clear anti-Asian sentiment, and has spent his entire career litigating on behalf of individuals who have suffered from illegal discrimination in employment, housing and education.

In this instance, the staff attorneys at the Justice Department would have in Lee a leader in whom they could place immediate confidence because he has confronted the very issues they face day in and day out. They would know that their chief could, despite being a political appointee, provide substantive guidance and assistance in difficult cases. His years of legal work, analyzing issues and facts from the perspective of parties who were adverse to the government would most certainly redound to the benefit of the entire nation. The irony in the attempt to derail this appointment is that Lee is precisely the kind of individual the Republican leadership says it wants. He is smart, hard-working, respectful of the concept of binding legal precedents and has a distinguished career litigating in the civil rights arena. The reason for denying him support is that he agrees with his president on one issue: affirmative action. In essence, he believes that this tool has been useful in providing opportunities to people who have been harmed by discrimination that operates in schools, workplaces and other important areas.

At no time has Lee stated support for preferences, quotas or set-asides. He has never expressed a lack of understanding about the state of the law. More important, he has never suggested, let alone stated, that he would ignore the dictates of the law as it has evolved to date. Nonetheless, we are told that he represents a danger to the stability and sanctity of the law.

Lee’s struggle in Washington is a prime example of why there continues to be doubt over the meaning of the words “merit” and “qualified.” Indeed, what is becoming clear is that it is a myth to say that merit guides the congressional confirmation process.

No doubt the objective criteria have been met by this nominee: stellar credentials earned at Yale University and Columbia Law School. Nor can you ask for more compelling professional experience than 23 years as a litigator on behalf of those who have been denied a fair shot.

But clearly, meeting the objective “criteria” and demonstrating “merit” are not where things end. Adding speculation about the nominee’s future conduct is changing the rules midstream.

Tragically, in this scenario it is the American people who may be denied the chance to have one of our best and brightest enter public service. Lee’s appointment would represent an opportunity to be inclusive of the diverse talents and people who make up this great nation, to demonstrate that the American people are striving toward securing real justice for all, led by an individual who has spent half his lifetime dedicated to that end.

As for Bill Lann Lee, he will undoubtedly continue to be the extraordinary individual he has always been. And more likely than not, he will view this experience as pathbreaking for future nominees. For that, we must thank him, and more important, recognize that his decision to seek this nomination was in itself an extraordinary act of courage. Knowing Lee, there will be no bitterness, only a deeper commitment to the principles of justice and equality that have guided him.