Bonus footage of the mayor of East Haven being an utter asshole and mocking Latinos at a news conference.
http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-conn-officers-arrested-mayor-reax,0,2435685.story

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. … The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

While I applaud DOJ’s action here, it is tempered by the recognition that this prosecution is rooted in identity politics. Civil rights remains an issue of group rights to the Federal government. Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of egregious violations of civil rights will go unprosecuted because DOJ can’t find a race, sex, sexual orientation, or some other identity politics hook to rouse their interest.

The hell? It’s not a victory when one government manages to do its fucking job and enforce our civil rights against the aggression of another government? What do you want, a pony?

“Would they be putting this sort of effort forward if the store owners had been white?”

Your question is irrelevant.

Not with this administration, it isn’t. The instances of their race-based decisions and treatment is overwhelming.

And actually, I think it should NEVER be irrelevant, whichever race you plug in there. The answer to “Would [the government] be putting forth the same level of effort if [person in question] was/wasn’t [insert race here]” should always ALWAYS be “Yes.”

White, black, brown, yellow, or purple, it should be the same. Skin color should be absolutely irrelevant.

“these heroes put their lives on the line for YOU every day blah blah blah”…

No collection of witness testimony is enough to convict cops; it’s hardly enough to indict them. Thank god for the video evidence. I’m surprised the cop didn’t tie up the loose ends and crush the camera.

What happened to the IA investigation? Why did the Feds have to come in?

Your question is irrelevant. The cops most likely would not have been harassing the store owners had they been white in the first place. There would be no DOJ action to be taken. And why does it matter?

(Predicted) Response from police:
Just an isolated incident. One bad apple does not spoil them all. Those officers were just doing their jobs, and like anyone else they just want to go home to their families at the end of the day. These officers are heroes. These officers have sacrificed themselves for the public. These officers are serving the public. We support our valiant officers. Those officers don’t make the laws they were enforcing. If the citizens weren’t doing anything wrong they should have nothing to hide.

Did I forget any?

Might as well add “The dog ate my homework”.

18USC242 makes it a crime for a public official using official authority under color of law (the FBI refers to these cases as simply “color of law offenses”) to infringe upon or deny any civil, statutory or constitutional right. The law doesn’t distinguish between local, county, state or federal rights. A simple verbal discouragement is worth a year in federal prison if convicted. The mere threat of deadly force (or its actual use) elevates the penalty to ten years in prison. If anyone actually dies, if sexual abuse occurs that wouldn’t have happened without the infringement or the victim is a minor, the penalty jumps to life in prison or execution.

18USC241 is conspiracy against rights, essentially two or more people working together to break 18USC242. The theory here is that such bad actors are the rare one bad apple in a group, so the chance for someone to think “wait a moment, this isn’t right” increases with population, so if they just forge ahead and follow the herd, they deserve what they get. All penalties start off one step more severe than those in 18USC242. Yes, this means that if two police officers are infringing upon your rights, and one rests his hand suggestively on his holstered pistol, both of them are guilty of a capital crime.

Whether or not simply being visibly armed with a deadly weapon while committing a crime constitutes a threat of deadly force is a gray area. Courts have gone both ways on it.

“Would they be putting this sort of effort forward if the store owners had been white?”