Fair Criticism: The Attorney General and Obscenity     8/28/2007
By Mario Diaz

There is no question that liberal Senators in Washington have taken advantage of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' resignation to practice their favorite sport, "Bush Bashing." Some have resorted to the usual heckling from the dugout. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, blamed Gonzales and Bush for "a severe crisis of leadership" at the Department of Justice (DOJ). And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) said that Attorney General Gonzales "lacked the spine to say no to Karl Rove."

Of course Sen. Reid shows no proof of this. But who knows? Maybe he wiretapped some meetings between them?

What we can say about Attorney General Gonzales is that he is the first Hispanic to hold the position of U.S. Attorney General, he comes from humble beginnings as one of eight children and as the son of migrant workers, and he worked as White House Counsel filling judicial vacancies with qualified nominees who respect the Constitution; all things to be proud of.

But this doesn't mean that Attorney General Gonzales is above fair criticism. Obscenity enforcement, for example, is an area where much more should have been done.

Concerned Women for America (CWA) applauded DOJ under the leadership of Attorney General Gonzales for establishing the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force in May 2005 and for appointing noted experts in the field, such as Bruce Taylor as counsel and Brent Ward as head of the taskforce. Although the rhetoric was certainly present, and we were hopeful that obscenity would once again be a priority at DOJ, not a lot of progress has been shown.

Earlier this year, in Budgeting Wars Part II: Feds Fail at Obscenity Enforcement, CWA's former Chief Counsel Jan LaRue took a close look at the prosecution of obscenity violations by DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). In this report, LaRue found a stark difference between policy and practice. She concluded:

At this point, we think somebody in Congress should require quarterly progress reports that account for how a good part of a $25.4 million dollar increase for crimes against children and obscenity is actually being used for obscenity enforcement and that somebody should be aware that when [the Child Exploitation Obscenity Section] CEOS has reported "40 obscenity indictments," it's counting individuals, not separate cases. Some cases have multiple defendants, and several began as child pornography investigations that were allowed to plead down to an obscenity charge.

It is imperative that the new Attorney General, whoever he or she might be, understand the importance of obscenity prosecution. It is crucial that he understand the difference between the federal obscenity statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1460-1470, and federal child pornography statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251-2256, 2260. He must understand that the only way to protect children is with strict prosecution of both obscenity and child pornography. The link between obscenity and pedophilia has been documented, and our children are too valuable for us to ignore it.

As we move past the initial political "brouhaha," I pray that issues like obscenity enforcement permeate the debate among Senators in Washington. I pray that the Senate will pay more attention to the concerns of the people they represent rather than merely concentrating on accumulating political currency.

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Producers Bank on DVD Sales for Hounddog Flop

CWA Applauds the State Attorneys General Crackdown on Craigslist Erotic Ads

Pornography and the Church

Pornography, Ivy League-Style

WRAP Week Highlights Awareness and Action Against Pornography

Crouse says WRAP up Porn and Throw it Out

WRAP up Porn and Throw it Out

WRAP Week: White Ribbons Against Pornography

New Levi’s Campaign Hits Below the Belt

Hounddog Update: A Call to Action