The two-term attorney general candidates have a lot in common. James has been a public advocate for civil rights, while Sussman has criticized James’ overuse of the office as a litigator. Both James and Sussman agree on almost every social issue, including taking on the NRA and protecting immigrants. However, Sussman’s record as an attorney must be the most compelling reason for voters.
Sussmann’s civil rights career
The allegations in the trial of Michael Sussmann, a former Justice Department prosecutor who later joined a law firm representing Democrats, are alarming. The former prosecutor is charged with lying to the FBI, and his trial begins on Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C. Much of the case will focus on controversies that surfaced during the 2016 presidential election. Ultimately, the jury will determine if Sussmann is guilty of committing a crime.
Sussmann has had a long and varied career in the civil rights arena. His case history includes a case in which a health department worker was fired after refusing to respond to sex advances made by his supervisor. Although his work has largely revolved around these causes, he did occasionally take cases outside his area of expertise to work with close friends. And while many of his cases have ended in victory, they were often taken because of personal relationships with his clients.
The government has argued that Sussmann’s prosecution violates federal law. However, a former prosecutor and two former defense attorneys have criticized the case. In addition to his prosecution, the case has cost him his law firm and his job. As a result, his family has been spending much of their time at the courthouse, waiting for a verdict in the case. There is no immediate word on whether he will be sentenced to jail.
His work on the NAACP case
For many years, the NAACP was a force in the struggle for civil rights. Although many people welcomed their efforts, others resisted. In the South, racial segregation remained widespread, and many people were unwilling to let go of this oppression. As a result, many people refused to send their children to a desegregated public school and refused to sit next to an African American on a lunch counter or bus.
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund was much younger than its adversaries, and it had fewer resources. They worked from law school and learned how to fight discrimination. The court’s decision in Plessy v. Ferguson was a misinterpretation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment’s authors never intended for schools to be segregated, and existing law did not take the discriminatory effects of segregation into account. Because integrated schools were a fundamental right in the United States, this case was a major victory for the NAACP and civil rights.
After the case was decided in the lower court, the NAACP appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The NAACP used this opportunity to claim that it had been denied the right to free speech and assembly. On December 13, 1971, the Supreme Court scheduled oral arguments. The nine-member panel, presided by Chief Justice Earl Warren, included some southerners and all white men. Carter’s argument was presented in front of nine justices, and he answered probing questions with aplomb.
His meeting with the FBI’s general counsel
Former FBI general counsel James Baker has resigned, and he is now the vice president of Perkins Coie. Baker was a former attorney with the FBI and served as the organization’s general counsel under James Comey. He left the FBI in 2018 but didn’t stop working for the agency. He spent time at the R Street Institute and worked as a CNN legal analyst before joining Twitter as a vice president of legal.
The FBI has accused Sussmann of lying to the government after he claimed to represent a “client” and had acted on behalf of a campaign client. In the interview, Sussmann admitted to operating on behalf of his client. But he argued that the FBI was not acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign. And the newspaper is reporting that Sussmann met with the FBI’s general counsel because he was a former employee.
During the Trump administration, the FBI’s investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and a Kremlin-linked bank is ongoing. The investigation is led by Special Counsel John Durham, who has so far brought three criminal prosecutions. The prosecutor is now waiting for the jury’s decision in this case. If the case proceeds, it could be a test for the special counsel. So far, it has been the first trial of the special counsel.