A new sheriff at Justice

0 Comments | Insight on the News, April 28, 1997 | by Susan Crabtree

As U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Eric Holder has been a frontline soldier in the city's war on drugs. Now, as deputy attorney general-designate, he reveals his strategy for dealing with the scourge of drugs.

To Eric Holder, the first black to lead the country's largest US. attorney's of office, marijuana is not just a gate way drug, it is an avenue that leads to violent crime and death. This 21-year resident of D.C. has walked the streets of Northwest and Northeast Washington investigating crack houses and witnessing the blank eyes and empty faces that linger on city street corners. Holder is convinced that selling marijuana in drug-plagued D.C. should be a felony, not simply a misdemeanor as current law dictates. He has drafted legislation introduced to the city council to change the law and has worked to institute mandatory minimum sentences for convicted drug dealers.

For months people speculated that Holder, 46, was preparing to challenge Democratic Mayor Marion Barry's bid for a fifth term next year, but when President Clinton nominated him in March to become deputy attorney general -- the No. 2 post at the Department of Justice -- the rumors quickly ended. The son of Barbadian immigrants and a Columbia Law School graduate, Holder served as a prosecutor at the Justice Department handling public-corruption cases before he was appointed to a D.C. Superior Court judgeship by President Reagan in 1988. Later, in the U.S. attorney's office, he earned national recognition for leading a federal investigation that ended with the indictment of Democratic former Rep. Dan Rostenkowski of Illinois on 17 counts of corruption, including mail fraud. Although he won't discuss the Clinton appointment, Holder reflects on his efforts to curb violent crime and illegal drugs.

Insight: What did you do to change the wave of violence that has overwhelmed the nation's capital?

Eric Holder: I have taken a lot of grief for my attempt to make selling marijuana a felony in the district, not just a misdemeanor. I introduced the legislation in December that would make distribution and possession with the intent to distribute marijuana a five-year felony. I've been criticized for it by reporters in various publications, saying things like I have "reefer madness." But what we found was that in 1991 about 11 percent of all juveniles who were arrested in the district tested positive for drugs. In 1996, we found that 62 percent of those who were arrested were now testing positive for drug use and that it was largely marijuana. And that is something we can change. Hearings are scheduled for April and I am hoping that we have enough support to push it through.

Insight: What examples of the human cost of drug abuse did you witness when you were walking the streets of the district?

EH: I saw it in a stark way when I was a judge in the district -- when I actually had the people in front of me who were defendants of drug-related violence. It's not an overstatement to say the drug problem has fundamentally changed the district. There have been complaints that certain sectors, especially certain parts of our cities that are the most distressed, have been wiped out -- a whole generation of young black men.... Their lives have been ruined from involvement with drugs. It's breathtaking.

What concerns me is down the road. In 15 to 20 years we're going to see the effects of these young guys -- there will be no young men and women to take leadership positions in the city. They are not going to be around. They will be dead or in jail or otherwise affected physically and mentally by drugs and they will not have the chance to lead traditional, productive lives.

Aside from a law-enforcement perspective, just as a citizen and a black man, that gives me great concern.

Insight: Do you remember a particular experience you had visiting the community?

EH: I remember speaking to a group of ex-offenders who were having a graduation ceremony from a [rehabilitation] program. All of them had drug-related convictions or drug problems. They had gone through a program put together by a very dedicated woman, and I was the speaker. What was really unique about this group is that they all asked for my card and I gave it to them. And what struck me was I that I got so many more calls from that day than any other speaking engagement.

They had one request: They wanted jobs. They all said that the drug problem had compromised their ability to get work because they had [criminal] convictions that made people wary of hiring them and they didn't have the means by which to support themselves.

They had the training now to be drug free and were not selling drugs anymore.

They had changed their lives. I think they were being sincere and that they were really striving to do something positive with their lives.

Insight: Why do you think there is o reliance on treatment programs to solve the problem?

EH: In a lot of ways we've seen the drug problem operate like a plague that has taken over the city. You see certain places devoid of things you expect to see in a thriving community. It is literally depressed; physically, psychologically depressed. You don't see activity on a scale you expect to see -- you don't see that vitality.