On the eve of a major address by President Barack Obama on his counterterrorism policy, the Obama administration revealed Wednesday that drone strikes since 2009 had killed four Americans overseas – one of whom, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was targeted in Yemen because he’d planned and was planning terrorist attacks on the United States – principally the plot to blow up an airliner over Detroit on Christmas Eve 2009.

Three others who were not “specifically targeted” were killed in circumstances the administration did not explain.

The revelation came in a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder to congressional leaders and chairmen of key congressional committees in which Holder said, “the president has directed me to disclose to you certain information” about the number of Americans killed by U.S. counterterrorism operations outside of areas of active combat such as Afghanistan.

Holder said the U.S. government was “aware of three other U.S. citizens who have been killed in such U.S. counterterrorism operations over that same time period (since 2009): Samir Khan, 'Abd al-Rahman Anwar al-Aulaqi, and Jude Kenan Mohammed. These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States.”

Jude Kenan Mohammed was on the FBI’s Most Wanted List and the FBI notice said, “On July 22, 2009, a Federal Grand Jury in North Carolina indicted Jude Kenan Mohammad for conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and conspiracy to murder, kidnap, maim, and injure persons in a foreign country. Mohammad is at large and a federal warrant was issued by the United States District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for his arrest.”

The FBI notice also said, “Mohammad speaks English and very limited Pashtun. Mohammad is believed to be in Pakistan.”

Jonathan Ernst / Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder

On al-Aulaqi, Holder said, “it was al-Aulaqi's actions -- and, in particular, his direct personal involvement in the continued planning and execution of terrorist attacks against the U.S. homeland -- that made him a lawful target and led the United States to take action.” Holder also told congressional leaders that secret information proves “al-Aulaqi's involvement in the planning of numerous plots against U.S. and Western interests and makes clear he was continuing to plot attacks when he was killed.” The origins of this information are being kept secret to protect U.S. intelligence methods and sources.Holder’s letter said, “Today's disclosure builds on the Administration's effort to pursue greater transparency around our counter-terrorism operations, including the President's commitment in this year's State of the Union. This disclosure was also intended to coincide with the speech the President will give tomorrow, in which he will discuss our broader counter-terrorism strategy.”

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 4:59 PM EDT

Amid controversies over a Justice Department subpoena of Associated Press phone records and the Internal Revenue Service’s scrutiny of conservative groups, Attorney General Eric Holder told the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that he doubted it would be “wise policy” to prosecute news media organizations for publishing classified information in the national security leaks case.

In a hearing that stretched well over four hours, Holder indicated that leakers inside the Obama administration, and not reporters, were the people his department was trying to find.

Holder said, "The focus should be on those people who break their oaths and put the American people at risk, not reporters who gather this information."

On the criminal probe into IRS scrutiny of conservative groups who’d applied for nonprofit status, he vowed a far-reaching national investigation which would not be limited to the Cincinnati IRS office that examines groups’ applications for nonprofit status.  

“The facts will take us wherever they take us,” he pledged to Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas.  

About an hour after Holder finished his testimony, President Barack Obama announced at the White House that Steve Miller, the acting IRS Commissioner, would resign at the request of Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.

Obama pledged to work “hand in hand with Congress to get this thing fixed” and to “do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again.”

The controversies over the IRS and the AP subpoenas threaten to become the most serious political crises of the Obama presidency.

The marathon hearing with Holder brought both Democratic and Republican members together in accord that the IRS scrutiny of conservative groups was alarming and that the broad scope of the Justice Department subpoena of Associated Press phone records threatened First Amendment rights.

But Holder repeatedly told members he could not shed much light on either controversy because he has recused himself from the leaks probe and because the criminal investigation of the IRS which he ordered last Friday has only just begun.

When House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., asked why it was necessary for the Justice Department to subpoena AP phone records if the AP was willing to cooperate with the investigation, Holder said, “I just don’t know…I don’t have the factual basis to answer.”

Holder said in a press conference Tuesday that decisions in the leak investigation were being made by Deputy Attorney General James Cole and that he, not Holder, “would have been the one who ultimately had to authorize the subpoena that went to the AP.”

Brendan Smialowski / AFP - Getty Images

Attorney General Eric H. Holder testifies during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill May 15, 2013 in Washington, DC.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., told Holder, “I think we’re going to have to talk to him (Cole) about this,” and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Goodlatte both called for Cole to come before the committee as a witness.

But Holder cautioned later in the hearing that Cole would be very constrained in what he could tell members of Congress about an ongoing investigation.

Sensenbrenner also used his time to berate Obama administration officials for not taking responsibility for what he saw as errors or misguided policies. He urged Holder, Cole and other Justice Department officials to go to the Truman library in Missouri and learn from the famous sign the former president had on his desk, which said “the buck stops here.”

In his grilling of Holder, Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama seemed skeptical about how, why and when Holder had recused himself in the national security leaks probe and why Holder had not put the recusal in writing and dated it. Lofgren also seemed skeptical about whether Holder acted in line with federal regulations in recusing himself.

But Holder explained that he had recused himself since he was one of a small number of top officials who’d had access to the national security secrets that had been leaked to the news media.

The House Ways and Means Committee has scheduled a hearing Friday to examine the IRS scrutiny of conservative groups.

The witnesses will be Miller and J. Russell George, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. George issued a report Tuesday which was highly critical of how the IRS scrutinized applications for nonprofit status.

But the IRS officials directly involved in the scrutiny of political groups are not slated to appear at Friday’s hearing.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, all 45 Republican senators said, “We demand that your Administration comply with all requests related to Congressional inquiries without any delay, including making available all IRS employees involved in designing and implementing these [sic] prohibited political screening, so that the public has a full accounting of these actions.”

Related stories:

•  Attorney General Holder faces questions on Capitol Hill
• Boehner on IRS controversy: 'Who's going to jail?'
• After AP leak, White House pushes for media-shield law 
• Obama message gets sidetracked

This story was originally published on Wed May 15, 2013 5:29 PM EDT

As the White House faces a trio of burgeoning controversies that have put the administration and agencies throughout Washington on the defensive, Attorney General General Eric Holder reiterated before a House panel Wednesday that he was not involved in the Justice Department's decision to seize two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists as a part of a leak probe.

LIVESTREAM: House Judiciary Committee hearing

The Justice Department has also opened an investigation into revelations that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status for additional scrutiny. In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Holder said that prosecutors are looking at several different statutes in the investigation of those actions. 

He said those potential violations could include an IRS statute that requires employees to do their jobs without favoritism, civil rights laws, the Hatch Act that restricts a federal employee's political activities, or the law against making false statements to investigators.

“The facts will take us wherever they take us,” he added, promising a nationwide investigation. 

Asked about the leak probe, Holder confirmed that Deputy Attorney General James Cole authorized the subpoenas on AP reporters' phone records after Holder recused himself from the matter.

Brendan Smialowski / AFP - Getty Images

Attorney General Eric Holder is sworn in during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill May 15, 2013 in Washington, DC.

Holder first announced Tuesday that he had recused himself from the AP leak probe because he had previously been questioned by the FBI about the intelligence breach.

He added Wednesday that he also turned over his own phone records as a part of that questioning. 

He told the committee that he recused himself because he was one of the “relatively limited number of people” who had first-hand knowledge of the leaked information – and also because he had more regular communication with reporters than Cole.

“I was a possessor of the information that was ultimately leaked,” he added. “And the question then is, who of those people who possessed that information – which was a relatively limited number of people  within the Justice Department – who of those people actually spoke in an inappropriate way to the Associated Press,” he added.

In response to questions, he said that he did not know the date of his recusal for certain and that there was not a written record of it.  He also said that the White House would not have been informed of the recusal. 

Holder has been widely criticized by Republicans for DOJ's handling of the matter, scrutiny Holder noted at the beginning of his remarks.

"The head of the [Republican National Committee] called for my resignation in spite of the fact that I was not the person who was involved in that decision," he said.

The routine Justice Department oversight hearing became a hot ticket after two scandals – the DOJ probe and the revelations about the IRS – erupted since the end of last week. The Obama administration also continues to be dogged by lingering questions over its administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi.

In opening remarks he was set to deliver before the House Judiciary Committee, Holder says the Justice Department “has taken critical steps to prevent and combat violent crime, to confront national security threats, to ensure the civil rights of everyone in this country, and to safeguard the most vulnerable members of our society.”

NBC's Pete Williams contributed to this report. 

This story was originally published on Wed May 15, 2013 1:07 PM EDT

With controversies growing over a Justice Department subpoena of Associated Press phone records and the Internal Revenue Service’s scrutiny of conservative groups, Attorney General Eric Holder was preparing to face the House Judiciary Committee in an oversight hearing Wednesday.

The hearing comes a day after Holder told reporters that he’d ordered an investigation to see if there were criminal violations in the IRS examination of conservative advocacy groups that had sought nonprofit status.  An inspector general’s report released Tuesday blamed poor management at the IRS for the scrutiny of Tea Party and other conservative groups and said the agency has been slow to correct the problems.

The attorney general also said he’d recused himself last year from any involvement in the Justice Department’s investigation of national security leaks. Holder said he took the step to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Holder will certainly field questions on both the phone records seizures and the IRS investigation but there are no mentions of either in prepared opening remarks he’s expected to deliver to the committee. 

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appears at a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington, May 14, 2013.

The Associated Press reported Monday that phone records of its reporters and editors had been subpoenaed and seized in that probe.

Holder said in a press conference Tuesday that decisions in the leak investigation were being made by Deputy Attorney General James Cole and “the deputy attorney general would have been the one who ultimately had to authorize the subpoena that went to the AP.”

Cole wrote to the AP on Tuesday that seeking phone records from media organizations “is undertaken only after all other reasonable alternative investigative steps have been taken.” He said that the Justice Department sought the AP phone records only after a comprehensive investigation which included conducting over 550 interviews and reviewing tens of thousands of documents.

Holder said Tuesday that it “certainly not the policy of this administration” to target reporters. What has been done in the leaks investigation was, he said, “not as a result of a policy to get the press.”

Previewing Wednesday’s hearing, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., indicated that the panel will question Holder on a wide range of topics, including the subpoena of AP phone records and the IRS vetting of conservative groups.

“Any abridgement of the First Amendment is very concerning, especially reports that the IRS targeted conservative groups for unwarranted scrutiny during an election year,” Goodlatte said. “Members of the committee will also ask pointed questions about the Justice Department’s decision to obtain two months’ worth of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press. Congress and the American people expect answers and accountability.”

The Virginia Republican also said that in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombings, the committee will want Holder to address how the Obama administration can better share information among federal agencies “so that we can better detect and deter future homegrown terrorist attacks.”

But the leaks investigation seems likely to be a dominant topic of the hearing.

Holder told reporters Tuesday, “This was a very, very serious leak. I’ve been a prosecutor since 1976 – and I have to say that this is among, if not the most serious, in the top two or three most serious leaks that I’ve ever seen. It put the American people at risk – and that is not hyperbole.”

The leaks probe was undertaken at a time of deep congressional concern that Obama administration officials, including CIA chief John Brennan when he served as President Obama’s counterterrorism advisor at the White House, were providing news organizations with selective bits of secret information.

The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, voted against confirming Brennan as CIA chief in March because he said Brennan had not been candid in discussing his own role in leaking.

Chambliss said he was “deeply disturbed” by Brennan's responses to the Senate committee regarding leaks of classified information, especially the disclosure relating to the al Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula underwear bomb plot in May of 2012.

This story was originally published on Wed May 15, 2013 9:22 AM EDT

Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters Tuesday that he recused himself last year from any involvement in an investigation of national security leaks.

Holder also announced Tuesday that he has ordered an investigation to see if there were criminal violations in the Internal Revenue Service scrutiny of conservative political groups that had sought non-profit status.

On the leaks case, Holder – who is slated to testify before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday afternoon -- reminded reporters that he testified to a congressional committee last year that he had recused himself to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

The Associated Press reported Monday that phone records of its reporters and editors had been subpoenaed and seized in that probe.

Holder said decisions in that investigation were being made by Deputy Attorney General James Cole and “the deputy attorney general would have been the one who ultimately had to authorize the subpoena that went to the AP.”

He added that since he was recused from the investigation, “I’m not familiar with all that went into the formulation of the subpoena.”

He also said he could not explain why voluntary cooperation wasn’t sought from the Associated Press before the subpoena was executed.

 “I am confident that the people who are involved in this investigation, who I know for a great many years and who I’ve worked with for a great many years, followed all of the appropriate Justice Department regulations and did things according to DOJ rules,” Holder said.

He added that it “certainly not the policy of this administration” to target reporters. What has been done in the leaks investigation was, he said, “not as a result of a policy to get the press.”

Referring to the leaks of national security information, Holder said, “This was a very, very serious leak. I’ve been a prosecutor since 1976 – and I have to say that this is among, if not the most serious, in the top two or three most serious leaks that I’ve ever seen. It put the American people at risk – and that is not hyperbole.”

Trying to find out who leaked the information “required very aggressive action,” Holder said.

Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid, D- Nev., on Tuesday joined other congressional critics of the Justice Department’s search of SAP’ phone records telling reporters  “I have trouble defending what the DOJ did. It’s inexcusable. There is no way to justify this.”

In a letter to Holder on Monday, Associated Press President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt said, "There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters.” Pruitt complained that the records could “disclose information about AP's activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know."

In a response, Cole wrote to Pruitt Tuesday that seeking phone records from media organizations “is undertaken only after all other reasonable alternative investigative steps have been taken.” He said that the Justice Department sought the AP phone records only after a comprehensive investigation which included conducting over 550 interviews and reviewing of tens of thousands of documents.

This story was originally published on Tue May 14, 2013 7:57 PM EDT

With a ding at the White House’s “humiliated” response, Sen. Rand Paul says he finally has the answer to the question that launched his marathon filibuster Wednesday on the Senate floor. 

“Hoo-ray,” the Kentucky Republican said upon being read a brief letter of response from Attorney General Eric Holder during an appearance on FOX News.

Paul led the nearly 13-hour filibuster in protest of what he called the Obama administration's lack of clarity about whether or not a U.S. citizen could be targeted by a drone attack on American soil. 

Holder's letter reads: "It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: 'Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil.' The answer to that question is no." 

Charles Dharapak / AP

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., leaves the floor of the Senate after his filibuster of the nomination of John Brennan to be CIA director on Capitol Hill in Washington, early Thursday, March 7, 2013.

“For 13 hours yesterday we asked that question, and so there is a result and a victory,” Paul said after being read the letter. “Under duress and under public humiliation the White House will respond and do the right thing.”

In a written statement issued later Thursday, Paul said that response guarantees "basic" rights of Americans.

"This is a major victory for American civil liberties and ensures the protection of our basic Constitutional rights. We have Separation of Powers to protect our rights," he said. "That's what government was organized to do and that's what the Constitution was put in place to do."

After holding forth on the Senate floor for almost 13 hours last night, Paul said that the curt letter from the Department of Justice sufficiently answered the question that fueled his Mr. Smith-style speechifying yesterday, which won him fans from Glenn Beck to Code Pink.

With the lengthy filibuster in the books, Paul had threatened to continue to hold up the nomination of CIA director John Brennan until Saturday morning if he didn’t receive an answer from the Obama administration.

“We’re using the leverage of holding up the vote,” he said on Beck’s show Thursday morning.. "And I can keep [the Senate] here through Saturday and they hate to work on weekends."

Brennan's nomination is now headed for a vote this afternoon. 

This story was originally published on Thu Mar 7, 2013 2:35 PM EST

In an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder defended the Obama administration’s targeted killings policy, even in cases of American citizens who may be on U.S. soil, in some situations where they are planning an imminent attack on the country.

Even as Holder finished his testimony, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., began a filibuster of CIA director nominee John Brennan as a gesture of protest against the administration’s policy.

Holder told the Judiciary Committee that he expects Obama himself will be speaking about the controversy in the near future.

The attorney general repeated what he had said in a letter this week to Paul, “The government has no intention to carry out any drone strikes in the United States. It’s hard for me to imagine a situation in which that would occur.”

Addressing Holder's "no intent" statement, Paul later said in his Senate speech, "I frankly don't think that's good enough."

Holder explained in his testimony that for terrorist suspects inside the United States, the government has the ability to arrest them and prosecute them. But there’s little or no feasibility of capture in places such as Pakistan, he said.

The use of drones inside the United States to kill a terrorists planning an attack is, he said, “entirely, entirely hypothetical.”

In a lengthy wrangle with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Holder repeatedly said the use of a drone to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who wasn’t an imminent threat would not be an “appropriate” use of lethal force, but it took some minutes before Holder said it would also not be constitutional.

Cruz told Holder, “I find it remarkable that in that hypothetical -- which is deliberately very simple -- you are unable to give a simple, one word one syllable answer: ‘No.’”

Holder said, “I thought I was saying ‘no.’ All right, no.”

Cruz will be offering a bill this week to clarify that the government does not have the authority to kill an American citizen on U.S. soil in the absence of an imminent threat.

Related: Holder: No drone strikes in US, except in 'extraordinary circumstance'

But Holder expressed doubt about such legislation, saying it might “run contrary to” the Article II powers the president has under the Constitution, but said he’d look at the legislation.

Under pressure from both Democratic and Republican Judiciary Committee members, Holder gave some indications the Obama administration may soon release the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memos which members of Congress have been seeking that would explain the justification for the administration’s use of targeted killings.

He won some understanding from committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who told Holder, “I realize the decision is not entirely in your hands.”

And Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has read at least some of the memos in her capacity as chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said “they are very sound opinions” and argued that the administration would be better off releasing them.

When she urged Holder to give the memos to Judiciary Committee members, he replied, “I have heard you. The president has heard you.”

Pressed on the same topic by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, Holder said, “I will be bringing that to the attention of the appropriate people within the administration.” He did not identify who those people were. “I’m not unsympathetic” to senators’ requests to see the OLC memos, he said.

When Lee complained that the Department of Justice white paper (first published by NBC News) that discusses the targeted killings policy did not clearly define “imminent” in its use of “imminent threat,” Holder replied that the white paper definition would be clear if Lee could read the OLC memos.

Holder faced criticism from Republican committee members such as Lee, Cruz and Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, but won strong support from one Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

“I want to congratulate you and the president,” he said, “I think you have thought long and hard about how to defend the homeland during difficult circumstances. I want to applaud your efforts with the drone program -- it has really helped us in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

He added, “I want to stand by you and the president to make sure we don’t criminalize the war and that the commander in chief continues to have the authority to protect us all.” He said “a lot of my colleagues are well-meaning but there is only one commander-in-chief in our Constitution.”

Citing previous wars in which Americans have joined the enemies’ cause, such as German-American saboteurs in World War II, Graham told Holder that it is a long-standing principle that such people are enemy combatants. Holder concurred with that view.

When Congress passed the use of force resolution after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks, Graham said, “We didn’t exempt the homeland, did we?” Holder agreed that Congress had not done exempted U.S. soil.

This story was originally published on Wed Mar 6, 2013 3:22 PM EST

House Republicans will file a civil suit against Attorney General Eric Holder during the August recess, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., has told NBC News.

House Republicans will file suit in an effort to compel Holder to release documents associated with the failed "Fast and Furious" gun-walking operation.

"We'll be filing a civil case during the break," Issa told NBC, "We will expect a day in court before a federal judge, which we have a 100 percent chance that the judge will hold that these documents should be delivered."

During negotiations between House Republicans and Holder in June, the White House invoked executive privilege on the documents Issa had requested for his investigation. Issa says that a federal judge should find that executive privilege does not apply to the documents he is requesting.

"The idea that you would withhold based on some executive privilege the documents related to a cover up of a crime is absurd, but that's the claim that the attorney general is hiding behind," Issa said.

The House voted on June 28th, 255-67, to hold Holder in contempt of Congress for not turning over documents related to the Fast and Furious operation. During that vote, the vast majority of Democrats walked off the floor of the House in protest of a measure they saw as a political witch hunt.

Soon after the House found Holder in contempt of Congress, the Justice Department penned a letter to House Republicans saying it would not be pursuing the case, stating that "the attorney general's response to the subpoena issued by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform does not constitute a crime." The DOJ cited the White House invoking executive privilege as a primary reason for not proceeding.

Larry Downing / REUTERS

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder during a meeting at the White House in Washington, July 26, 2012.

The DOJ's response has left Republicans with few options, according to Issa, who compared the current situation with congressional attempts to retrieve the Nixon tapes during their investigation into the Watergate scandal in the 1970s.

"We're seeking a remedy and the remedy is an order to compel," Issa said. "Nixon didn't respond to Congress, he responded to federal judges, ultimately the Supreme Court, ordering that he had no such privilege to cover up the tapes. And these are no different than the Nixon tapes, we're asking for documents related to a cover up of lying to Congress."

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.

In remarks to the NAACP in Houston, the attorney general said the Justice Department "will not allow political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens of their most precious right."

Pat Sullivan / AP

Attorney General Eric Holder says he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.

Under the law passed in Texas, Holder said that "many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them — and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them."

"We call those poll taxes," Holder added spontaneously, drawing applause as he moved away from the original text of his speech with a reference to a fee used in some Southern states after slavery's abolition to disenfranchise black people.

The 24th amendment to the constitution made that type of tax illegal.

Holder spoke a day after a trial started in federal court in Washington over the 2011 law passed by Texas' GOP-dominated Legislature that requires voters to show photo identification when they get to the polls.

Under Texas' law, Holder noted, a concealed handgun license would serve as acceptable ID to vote, but a student ID would not. He went on to say that while only 8 percent of white people do not have government-issued photo IDs, about 25 percent of black people lack such identification.

"I don't know what will happen as this case moves forward, but I can assure you that the Justice Department's efforts to uphold and enforce voting rights will remain aggressive," the attorney general said.

Holder said the arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate and that "we will simply not allow this era to be the beginning of the reversal of that historic progress."

"I will not allow that to happen," he added.

The attorney general spoke at the 103rd convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which is launching a battle against new state voter ID laws. NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous has likened the fight against conservative-backed voter ID laws passed in several states to "Selma and Montgomery times," referring to historic Alabama civil rights confrontations of the mid-1960s.

Holder, the first black man named U.S. Attorney General, was received with resounding applause, a standing ovation and chants of "Holder, Holder, Holder" at the convention.

Those chants quickly changed to "stand your ground, stand your ground," a reference to a Florida law that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is using to defend fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager he encountered while patrolling his community in February. Police did not initially arrest or charge Zimmerman, saying the "stand your ground" law allowed self-defense. He was later charged with second-degree murder.

Holder said the Justice Department under his leadership has taken unprecedented steps to study and prevent violence against youth and address the high homicide rate among young black men.

Finally, the attorney general noted with pride that the U.S. Supreme Court in two recent rulings regarding President Barack Obama's health care law and immigration laws passed in Arizona, largely supported the federal government and the Department of Justice. However, he said, he remained concerned that Arizona law enforcement, under the portion of the law upheld by the court, would be able to check the immigration status of any person suspected of being in the United States illegally.

"No American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like," Holder said.

Gerardo Mora / Getty Images

Republicans in the House voted Thursday to cite Attorney General Eric Holder for contempt of Congress.

Updated 5:01 p.m. - Republicans in the House voted Thursday to cite Attorney General Eric Holder for contempt of Congress in a politically-charged vote stemming from an investigation into alleged gun-running by the U.S. government.

The House voted 255-67, with one member voting "present," to cite Holder for criminal contempt. Most Democrats, led by the Congressional Black Caucus, abstained from the vote and staged a walk-out. But 17 conservative moderate and Democrats voted in favor of the resolution; two Republicans broke ranks to oppose it.

The House staged the vote against Holder for refusing to turn over documents subpoenaed by the House Oversight and Government Reform in relation to its investigation into the "Fast and Furious" program. The investigation is probing whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms deliberately allowed firearms to fall into the hands of drug cartels in Mexico.

The vote came on a day already marked as politically significant, after the Supreme Court issued its opinion upholding President Barack Obama's signature health reform law.

"Over the past fourteen months, the Justice Department accommodated Congressional investigators, producing 7,600 pages of documents, and testifying at eleven Congressional hearings. In an act of good faith, this week the administration made an additional offer which would have resulted in the Committee getting unprecedented access to documents dispelling any notion of an intent to mislead," White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said in a statement. "But unfortunately, a politically-motivated agenda prevailed and instead of engaging with the president in efforts to create jobs and grow the economy, today we saw the House of Representatives perform a transparently political stunt."

Republicans had sought an agreement with the White House earlier in the week, but talks broke down.

"We'd rather not be there. We'd rather have the attorney general and president work with us to get the bottom of a very serious issue," House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) told reporters on Capitol Hill Wednesday morning. "We're going to proceed. We've given them ample opportunity to comply."

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, speaking after the walk-out, called the vote an "abuse of power."

The vote, like most scheduled in Congress for the rest of this summer, is certainly imbued with election year politics. The oversight panel, led by California Rep. Darrell Issa, has been a consistent thorn in the administration's side, and has tangled frequently with Holder.

"Today's vote is the regrettable culmination of what became a misguided -- and politically motivated -- investigation during an election year," Holder said. "By advancing it over the past year and a half, Congressman Issa and others have focused on politics over public safety."

Tensions escalated last week when the White House invoked executive privilege over documentation sought by Issa as his committee prepared its own contempt vote. Republicans, in turn, have asked how the White House could invoke privilege when there are few indications that it had anything to do with "Fast and Furious."

That program came to national attention in late 2010 when a border agent was killed with a firearm purchased by suspects under investigation by the ATF. Conservative news outlets have pushed the story as a potential example of federal malfeasance, and Republicans have voiced suspicion about whether the Obama administration had known about the program. A Fortune magazine investigation published Wednesday, however, suggesting the ATF's work to intercede in illegal arms trafficking was hamstrung by personnel disputes and prosecutorial discretion.

"It is a political hatchet job and I believe the American people are disgusted with Congress, these types of actions, and we should vote no on this contempt process that will be on the floor tomorrow and return to the real problems confronting the American people," New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D) said on Wednesday of the vote.

But 17 of Maloney's colleagues -- as many 20 conservative and moderate Democrats, according to reports -- broke with their party and join Republicans in holding Holder in contempt. The politically powerful National Rifle Association sent notice to lawmakers that it intends to "score" this vote -- or, in other words, monitor members' votes in determining their endorsements in this fall's elections. (The pro-gun rights group is encouraging a "yes" vote to cite Holder for contempt.)

Democrats, when they controlled the House in 2007, voted to cite then-White House chief of staff Josh Bolton and former White House counsel Harriet Miers for contempt for refusing to testify in an investigation into allegedly politically-motivated firings of U.S. attorneys.

But contempt citations -- the House voted Thursday on both a criminal and civil contempt citation -- rarely proceed with much effect. While the citations are usually referred to a U.S. Attorney to present before a grand jury, administrations have historically invoked privileges that, they contend, don't compel them to prosecute.

The whole situation would seem to risk adding a degree of tarnish for the Obama administration as the president himself heads into the thick of the election season. Republicans have also sought to stoke inquiries into the administration's management of a program of loans to green energy companies, including the defunct solar energy firm Solyndra.

But while Mitt Romney frequently mentions the Solyndra bankruptcy on the campaign trail, he's made scant reference to "Fast and Furious." A spokesman for said the former Massachusetts governor supports citing Holder for contempt.

NBC's Frank Thorp contributed reporting.

Five months before the general election, the Obama administration and Republican House are locked in a bitter fight over executive privilege. NBC's Domenico Montanaro reports.