I haven't been following politics long enough to know much about past AG's but, it seems that Holder is constantly doing something to upset people.

For poker players, even though it was the SDNY branch, BF was under Holders watch.

There's the vote he will face on contempt charges for Fast and Furious: http://frontporchpolitics.com/2012/0...gainst-holder/

He wanted to try alleged terrorists in NYC for some reason. His DOJ won't enforce DOMA, good or bad, he should still enforce the laws on the books, no? He dropped the civil suit against the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation.

I'm sure he has done a lot of good for the US, but those stories aren't ever going to be as newsworthy as the negatives, and it seems he just has been a horrible AG. But how does he compare to past AG's?

No, they shouldn't. The executive has no duty to enforce and defend bad laws. Or else you think cops should patrol looking for people with ice cream cones in their back pockets on sundays in certain states?

That's because there was no case. This was also a good decision.

Seems like John Mitchell has to be in consideration for the worst AG ever, Watergate and all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_N._Mitchell

He is certainly one of the worst but strangely you mention all the good decisions he made.

What would you consider to be his bad decisions?

This is obviously wrong. The executive doesn't get to simply pick and choose what it deems bad or not, that would give an already bloated executive massively more power. Amend this to say that the executive does not have a duty to enforce and defend laws it deems unconstitutional (not simply bad policy) and you have a better argument.

Out of his list, only FnF. I was very surprised he did not resign for this reason alone.

Rounding out my top five, in no particular order:

Providing legal cover for Obama's assassination program/Northwestern speech;
Lawsuits, threats, and raids against medical marijuana dispensaries;
Lawsuit against Arizona re immigration statute;
Prosecuting low-level whistleblowers for espionage while protecting high-level leakers.

Of all the things about this post that make me sad for America, the bolded is in a class by itself.

At least bring up the stuff that was really truly bad.

Incorrect. The government does not have the resources to prosecute every violation of every statute, nor would we want them to. Hence the power of prosecutorial discretion.

@brad Thanks, you are well versed in your AG! The only thing I thought of was medical marijuana.

We're not talking about prosecutorial discretion wrt DOMA. We're talking about defending the constitutionality of a federal law properly passed by Congress and signed by the President.

Whether to spend time and money defending the constitutionality of DOMA is an excellent example of the administration exercising appropriate discretion. There are private parties litigating the issue and there is no need for AG to get involved.

Worst op ever?

"Bad laws" is completely relative, I'm sure a bunch of people think DOMA is a "good law", it's more the thought that an AG should enforce what ever laws are on the books no matter what, if you don't like the law then fight to have it changed.

I get the point about the beyond absurd laws that are still in some states books, and I would argue that everyone thinks the ice cream back pocket law is just plain dumb, but I would also argue that a lot of people think DOMA is a viable enforceable law. In the same fashion people have disagreements about the legality of the individual mandate in Obamacare.

Links to the bad things he's done? Also links to what other AG's have done, I don't know if I could name another AG w/o google, that's how little I know about past AG's. Anyone have stories/articles/links to terribad or good past AG decisions for comparison?

Also what has Holder done good for the US? Has he done anything outstanding, I really don't know.

I guess this guy takes the cake.