Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

Police officers wearing riot gear push back demonstrators next to St. John's Episcopal Church outside of the White House, June 1, 2020 in Washington D.C., during a protest over the death of George Floyd. (Photo: Jose Luis Magana / AFP via Getty Images)

1,250 Former DOJ Officials Demand Investigation Into Barr's Involvement in Violently Dispersing Demonstrators Near White House

"None of us would ever have considered directing or engaging in such actions to be consistent with our oaths to support and defend the Constitution."

Julia Conley

More than 1,250 former Department of Justice employees on Wednesday called on the department's inspector general to open an investigation into reports that Attorney General William Barr personally ordered the tear-gassing of protesters in Washington, D.C. on June 1. 

The former employees wrote that Inspector General Michael Horowitz must get to the bottom of Barr's involvement in the dispersing of the crowd, which was part of the nationwide uprising against racial injustice following the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. 

The Washington Post reported last week that Barr directed law enforcement officers on the ground to deploy tear gas, rubber bullets, and stun grenades at protesters just before President Donald Trump walked through the park to get to a nearby church for a photo-op. 

The attorney general himself has been unclear about his involvement, reads the letter, which was organized by the nonprofit advocacy group Protect Democracy. 

"While the full scope of the Attorney General's role is not yet clear, he has admitted that he was present in front of the White House before law enforcement personnel took action to disperse the crowd," wrote the former employees. "Department of Justice and White House personnel initially said that the Attorney General gave an order to law enforcement personnel to 'get going' or 'get it done.' A day later, the Attorney General told the Associated Press that he was 'not involved in giving tactical commands.'"

At least one Justice Department official and White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany have said Barr arrived at the scene on June 1 to tell police officers to disperse the crowd. 

Barr also falsely claimed in an interview with CBS News this week that pepper spray, which Washington, D.C.'s Park Police acknowledged using, is not a "chemical irritant."

"Based on what we now know, these actions violated both the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which protects freedom of speech and the press, and the right to assemble; and the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable seizures, to include objectively unreasonable uses of force by law enforcement officers," wrote the signatories. "None of us would ever have considered directing or engaging in such actions to be consistent with our oaths to support and defend the Constitution."

The letter was signed by former officials including Vanita Gupta, now president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; civil rights attorney Sasha Samberg-Champion; and John Dean, former White House counsel under President Richard Nixon.

Last week, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also called for a federal investigation into Barr's involvement in ordering the Park Police force to disperse the protesters.

Warren also demanded a probe into any role the U.S. military has played in responding to nationwide protests over police brutality in recent weeks, after the president and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper urged governors to "dominate" Americans engaged in civil disobedience. 

In the letter to Horowitz, the former DOJ employees wrote that they are "disturbed" by Barr's use of a number of federal agencies throughout the country to quell "lawful First Amendment activity."

"We have profound doubts that the personnel deployed from these agencies are adequately trained in policing mass protests or protecting the constitutional rights of individuals who are not subject to arrest or have not been convicted of a crime," the group wrote.

"Especially in view of the events in Lafayette Square," the signatories added, "we have no assurance that these officers are lawfully deployed, that they will respect the rights of the civilians they encounter, or that there are proper mechanisms in place to identify and investigate possible law enforcement misconduct."


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

'Egregious': Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Mail-In Voting Law

The ruling was stayed pending an appeal to the state's Supreme Court and as one voting advocate put it: "The fight's not over yet, folks."

Julia Conley ·


Big Win for Open Internet as Court Upholds California Net Neutrality Law

One legal advocate called the Ninth Circuit's opinion "a great decision and a major victory for internet users in California and nationwide."

Kenny Stancil ·


Poll Shows Majority in US Want Diplomacy, Not War With Russia Over Ukraine

The survey's findings echo the pleas of progressive lawmakers, who assert "there is no military solution" to the crisis involving the world's two foremost nuclear powers.

Brett Wilkins ·


'Abortion Bans Kill People': Death of Woman Unleashes Protests in Poland

"The politicized tribunal has caused hell for women in Poland that must end as soon as possible—before another one of us dies."

Jessica Corbett ·


Clyburn Asks: Who Would Oppose Means-Testing Child Tax Credit? Answer: Lots of People

"There is literally not a single thing that the means-tested approach is better at than the universal approach," said one policy expert.

Jake Johnson ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.


Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo