Uncategorized

“Conceding that the National School Boards Association letter was the only basis for the Justice Department’s actions”

Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of the Biden Administration’s use of federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources against parents voicing concerns about controversial curricula and education-related policies at local school board meetings. This oversight began in October 2021 following the issuance of a memorandum from Attorney General Merrick Garland directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation and all U.S. Attorney’s Offices—among other Department components—to examine and address threats posed by parents at school board meetings.

Although the Biden Administration declined to cooperate with this oversight in the 117th Congress, whistleblower disclosures and a report commissioned by the National School Boards Association (NSBA) shed some light on how the Biden Administration colluded with the NSBA to create a justification to use federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources against parents. There were gaps in the information available to the Committee then, primarily because the Biden administration did not participate in the NSBA’s third-party report. On February 3, 2023, Chairman Jordan subpoenaed the Justice Department, FBI, and Education Department for documents necessary to advance the Committee’s oversight and inform potential legislative reforms.

From the initial set of material produced in response to the subpoenas, it is apparent that the Biden Administration misused federal law-enforcement and counterterrorism resources for political purposes. The Justice Department’s own documents demonstrate that there was no compelling nationwide law-enforcement justification for the Attorney General’s directive or the Department components’ execution thereof.1 After surveying local law enforcement, U.S. Attorney’s offices around the country reported back to Main Justice that there was no legitimate law-enforcement basis for the Attorney General’s directive to use federal law enforcement and counterterrorism resources to investigate school board-related threats. For example:

• One U.S. Attorney reported that “this issue was very poorly received” by his local law-enforcement community and “described by some as a manufactured issue.”2 He continued: “No one I spoke with in law enforcement seemed to think that there is a serious national threat directed at school boards, which gave the impression that our priorities are misapplied.”3

• Another U.S. Attorney’s Office reported that the local FBI field office in the area “did not see any imminent threats to school boards or their members . . . , nor did they ascertain any worrisome trends in that regard.”

Notes and links on the National School Board Association “weaponizing” the US Justice Department.