January, 16 2020, 11:00pm EDT
Democracy 21 Files Complaint Against Attorney General Barr for Repeated Failures to Comply with DOJ Norms, Rules and Standards of Conduct
Complaint cites pattern of bias by Barr to protect President Trump at expense of carrying out DOJ mission to "ensure fair and impartial administration of justice."
WASHINGTON
Democracy 21 filed a complaint today with the Department of Justice requesting an investigation and remedial action against Attorney General William Barr for his repeated failures to comply with DOJ norms, rules and standards of conduct. The complaint was filed with DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility and Departmental Ethics Office.
According to the Democracy 21 complaint:
The improper actions by Attorney General Barr cover a wide range of his statements and activities but all result from a single overriding impropriety: the Attorney General has eschewed the core mission of the Department of Justice "to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."
Attorney General Barr has instead repeatedly demonstrated bias in acting to protect the personal and political interests of President Trump, as opposed to protecting the interests of the American people. He has done this to the detriment of the country and in derogation of the mission and integrity of the Department he heads.
According to Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer:
Attorney General Barr has repeatedly abused his office to provide cover for President Trump. The Attorney General has acted in biased ways and violated Justice Department norms, standards and rules to protect President Trump at the expense of fulfilling his responsibilities to provide fair and impartial administration of justice.
Attorney General Barr has made improper attacks on the investigations of DOJ Special Counsel Mueller and DOJ Inspector General Horowitz, has made unjustified and unsubstantiated claims to protect President Trump and failed to recuse himself from the Ukraine whistleblower matter involving the President in which Barr was directly implicated by Trump.
Attorney General Barr is doing enormous damage to the integrity and credibility of the Justice Department he leads. It is the responsibility of the Office of Professional Responsibility and the Departmental Ethics Office to hold Barr accountable for his repeated improper actions.
The complaint forwarded a letter also raising concerns about Barr that was sent by the New York City Bar Association to the congressional leaders. The complaint stated:
We enclose for your information a letter sent by the New York City Bar Association to the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate which expresses "serious concerns about the propriety of Barr's recent actions and statements." The letter urges Congress "to commence formal inquiries into a pattern of conduct by Attorney General William P. Barr that threatens public confidence in the fair and impartial administration of justice."
According to the Democracy 21 complaint:
As we discuss below, Attorney General Barr has directly contradicted, misrepresented or undermined the independent, non-partisan and credible work of both the Department's Inspector General and its Special Counsel, in order to blunt conclusions by these officials which were contrary to the views and interests of President Trump. He has publicly echoed the President's inflammatory rhetoric about "spying" and "collusion" without providing any adequate legal basis for using these terms. And he has refused to recuse himself from sensitive Department decisions about the handling of a whistleblower complaint alleging a gross abuse of power by President Trump and in which the Attorney General himself is directly and personally implicated.
The complaint continued:
It is the clear duty of the Attorney General always to maintain fidelity to the Constitution and to the nation's legal system, and never to abdicate these responsibilities to protect the President's personal or political interests at the expense of the impartial administration of justice.
Attorney General Barr has repeatedly failed meet this critical obligation to the American people. Therefore, as the Justice Department officials who have the responsibility to safeguard the norms, standards and rules that protect the Department's integrity and credibility, it falls to you to investigate and take appropriate remedial action to address the Attorney General's improper conduct.
According to the complaint, Attorney General Barr and U.S Attorney Durham publicly challenged and criticized the findings of the DOJ Inspector General that the Justice Department had sufficient basis to open the Russia investigation in 2016 and that the FBI and Justice Department had acted without political bias or impropriety in conducting the investigation.
The complaint stated:
Most importantly, DOJ rules prohibit Department officials from publicly commenting on open criminal investigations. These rules state that Department personnel may not "confirm the existence of or otherwise comment about ongoing investigations" and may not comment on "the nature or progress" of an "ongoing investigation." USAM SS 1-7.400 (April 2018).
In general, this provision forbids Department officials, including the Attorney General, from engaging in any discussion about active criminal investigations, except in limited, specific circumstances that are not applicable here.
The statements issued by both Attorney General Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham disagreeing with the key conclusions of the Inspector General report were clearly based on their views about the findings of the parallel criminal investigation they are conducting into the same matter that was investigated by the Inspector General. Thus, Attorney General Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham chose to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation in order to attack the findings of the Inspector General and thereby improperly provided cover for President Trump's obsessive attacks on the 2016 Russia/Trump investigation opened by the Justice Department and the FBI.
Democracy 21 believes these statements were in violation of DOJ rules prohibiting Department officials from commenting on open criminal investigations.
The complaint continued:
By publicly attacking the Inspector General report immediately upon its issuance, by specifically disagreeing with its central conclusion, and by having U.S. Attorney Durham follow with his challenge to the report, Attorney General Barr undermined his own Inspector General and attacked his own Department. Barr demonstrated his bias and fealty to President Trump, contravening the Department's mission of promoting "fair and impartial justice for all Americans," in favor of echoing President Trump's irresponsible attacks on the Justice Department itself.
The complaint then detailed the following actions Barr has taken since becoming Attorney General:
- Barr testified before Congress, without any substantiation, that FBI and Justice Department officials engaged in "spying" on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.
- Barr sent a letter to Congress mischaracterizing the Mueller report ahead of its release, leaving it as the only information available to the public about the report for almost a month. Barr then refused Special Counsel Mueller's request to release the summaries included in the report and held a press conference hours before the release of the full report where he continued to mischaracterize it.
- Barr failed to recuse himself from overseeing matters being consideration by DOJ and related to the whistleblower complaint about President Trump's call with the Ukrainian President, in which Trump mentioned Barr by name five times.
The complaint concluded:
This pattern of biased behavior by Barr is in stark conflict with his duty to ensure the "impartial administration of justice on behalf of all Americans." It is contrary to the mission, the norms, the rules, and the standards of conduct of the Justice Department and it seriously undermines the integrity and credibility of the Justice Department in the eyes of the American people.
Because you are responsible for safeguarding the institutional integrity of the Justice Department and the standards of behavior that govern its officials, Attorney General Barr's pattern of improper behavior warrants investigation and appropriate remedial action by your offices. Democracy 21 strongly calls on you to fulfill that responsibility.
Read the full complaint here.
Democracy 21 is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to making democracy work for all Americans. Democracy 21, and its education arm, Democracy 21 Education Fund, work to eliminate the undue influence of big money in American politics, prevent government corruption, empower citizens in the political process and ensure the integrity and fairness of government decisions and elections. The organization promotes campaign finance reform and other related political reforms to accomplish these goals.
(202) 355-9600LATEST NEWS
New Jersey Governor Signs Freedom to Read Act Barring Book Bans
The law, said the Democrat, "cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students."
Dec 09, 2024
Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Monday signed legislation protecting librarians and prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books—a move that came as Republican state lawmakers are proscribing a record number of titles, many of them works addressing sexual orientation, gender identity, and racial injustice.
Flanked by educators, librarians, and other advocates, Murphy signed
A.3446/S.2421—known as the Freedom to Read Act—in the Princeton Public Library.
"The Freedom to Read Act cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students," said Murphy. "Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others. I'm proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely."
According to a statement from Murphy's office:
Under the law, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Further, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are prevented from censoring library material based on a disagreement with a viewpoint, idea, or concept, or solely because an individual finds certain content offensive, unless they are restricting access to developmentally inappropriate material for certain age groups.
The legislation "also provides protections for library staff members against civil and criminal lawsuits related to complying with this law."
New Jersey Association of School Librarians President Karen Grant said that "the Freedom to Read Act recognizes the professionalism, honor, work ethics, and performance of school and public library staff" and "promotes libraries as trusted sources of information and recognizes the many roles that libraries play in students' lives."
"The bill will protect the intellectual freedom of students as well as acknowledge that school libraries are centers for voluntary inquiry, fostering students' growth and development," Grant added. "Additionally, we are grateful for the broad coalition of support from so many organizations for this legislation."
The leader of one of those groups—Garden State Equality executive director Christian Fuscarino—said, "Gov. Murphy just made it clear: In New Jersey, censorship loses, and freedom wins."
"At a time when access to diverse and inclusive materials is under attack across the nation, this legislation sends a powerful message that New Jersey will stand firm in protecting intellectual freedom and fostering a culture of understanding and inclusion," Fuscarino added.
The New Jersey law comes amid a near-tripling in the number of books banned or challenged by Republican state lawmakers and right-wing organizations over the past year, with PEN America counting over 10,000 such titles during the 2023-24 academic year—up from 3,362 titles during the previous scholastic year.
With Murphy's signature, New Jersey joins Minnesota and Illinois in passing state legislation to counter GOP book-banning efforts.
As the Chicago Tribunereported Sunday, "a number of school districts, many of them in deeply conservative areas of south and central Illinois," are giving up state grants rather than adopting principles against book-banning."Keep ReadingShow Less
'Completely Un-American': Progressives Slam Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship
"Emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," said Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Dec 09, 2024
Progressives in Congress and other migrant rights advocates sharply criticized U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for his comments on immigration during a Sunday interview, including on his hopes to end birthright citizenship.
During a 76-minute interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker, Trump said he "absolutely" intends to end birthright citizenship, potentially through executive order, despite the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Among many lies the Republican told, he also falsely claimed that the United States is the only country to offer citizenship by birth; in fact, there are dozens.
In response,
outgoing Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on social media Monday: "This is completely un-American. The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship. Trump cannot unilaterally end it, and any attempt to do so would be both unconstitutional and immoral."
Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) similarly stressed that "birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution as a cornerstone of American ideals. It reflects our belief that America is the land of opportunity. Sadly, this is just another in the long line of Trump's assault on the U.S. Constitution."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants, said in a statement: "'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.' It is important to remember who we are, where many of us came from, and why many of our families traveled here to be greeted by the Mother of Exiles, the Statue of Liberty."
Ramirez argued that "the story of our nation wouldn't be complete without the sweat, tears, joy, dreams, and hopes of so many children of immigrants who are citizens by birthright and pride themselves on being AMERICANS. It is the story of so many IL-03 communities, strengthened by the immigration of people from Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Mexico, and Guatemala, among others. It is the story of many members of Congress who can point to the citizenship of their forebears and ancestors because of immigration and birthright."
"Let's be clear: Trump is posing the question of who gets to be an American to our nation. And given that today's migrants are from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin and Central America, it is clear he is questioning who are the 'right' people to benefit from birthright citizenship," she continued. "Questioning birthright citizenship is anti-American, and eliminating it through executive action is unconstitutional. Donald Trump knows that."
"But emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the Constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," she warned. "I—like many sons and daughters of immigrants and first-generation Americans—believe in and fight for a land of freedom, opportunities, and equality. To live into that promise, we must stand against white nationalism—especially when it is espoused at the highest levels of government."
Although Republicans are set to control both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives next year, amending the Constitution requires support from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures, meaning that process is unlikely to be attempted for this policy.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) highlighted the difficulties of passing constitutional amendments while discussing Trump in a Monday appearance on CNN. The incoming chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was born in the Dominican Republic and is the first formerly undocumented immigrant elected to Congress.
As Mother Jones reporter Isabela Dias detailed Monday:
Critics of ending birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants argue it would not only constitute bad policy, but also a betrayal of American values and, as one scholar put it to me, a "prelude" to mass deportation.
"It's really 100 years of accepted interpretation," Hiroshi Motomura, a scholar of immigration and citizenship at UCLA's law school, told me of birthright citizenship. Ending birthright citizenship would cut at the core of the hard-fought assurance of equal treatment under the law, he said, "basically drawing a line between two kinds of American citizens."
Trump's NBC interview also addressed his long-promised mass deportations. The president-elect—whose first administration was globally condemned for separating migrant families at the southern border and second administration is already filling up with hard-liners—suggested Sunday that he would deport children who are U.S. citizens with undocumented parents.
"I don't want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back," Trump told Welker.
Responding in a Monday statement, America's Voice executive director Vanessa Cárdenas said, "There's a growing consensus that the Trump mass deportation agenda will hit American consumers and industries hard, but the scope of what Trump and his team are proposing goes well beyond the economic impact."
"Trump and allies are making clear their mass deportation agenda will include deporting U.S. citizens, including children, while aiming to gut a century and a half of legal and moral precedent on birthright citizenship," she added. "In total, their attacks go well beyond the narrow lens of immigration to the fundamental question of who gets to be an American."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Green, Indigenous Groups Warns Arctic Still at Grave Drilling Risk When Trump Returns
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2024
Wildlife protection groups and Indigenous leaders in Alaska said Monday that they would push to discourage bidding in an oil and gas lease sale just announced by the U.S. Interior Department for part of the Arctc National Wildlife Refuge.
Under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which opened the refuge for oil and gas drilling, the Biden administration announced the second of two lease sales, set to be held on January 9, 2025.
The first Trump administration held the initial lease sale in 2021, but with banks and insurance companies increasingly reticent to back drilling projects in the area, it generated little interest and led to less than 1% of the projected sale revenue.
Releasing its final record of decision, the Interior Department said Monday that 400,000 acres of wilderness in the refuge's 1.6-million-acre northwest Coastal Plain would be put up for bidding at a minimum price of $30 per acre—despite vocal opposition from the Gwich'in Nation and the Iñupiat Alaska Natives.
The land supports local communities as well as porcupine caribou herds and polar bears.
"Our way of life, our food security, and our spiritual well-being is directly tied to the health of the caribou and the health of this irreplaceable landscape," Kristen Moreland, executive director of Gwich'in Steering Committee, toldBloomberg News. "Every oil company stayed away from the first lease sale, and we expect them to do the same during the second."
The record of decision concludes the Bureau of Land Management's process for developing a supplemental environmental impact statement, which was required after President-elect Donald Trump's first administration completed an analysis with "fundamental flaws and legal errors," as the Sierra Club said Monday.
Selling the drilling rights just before Trump takes office could complicate the GOP's plans to hold a more expansive sale later on, but Dan Ritzman, director of Sierra Club's Conservation Campaign, emphasized that regardless of who is in office when the sale takes place, "oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge is a direct threat to some of the last untouched landscapes on Alaska's North Slope and to the caribou herds that the Gwich'in people rely on."
"The 2017 tax act, forced through Congress by Donald Trump and his Big Oil CEO allies, opened up the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing," said Ritzman. "Letting him oversee a lease sale over these pristine lands would be beyond irresponsible. In the meantime, President [Joe] Biden should listen to the Gwich'in and do all that he can to preserve these lands and waters. His legacy is on the line."
Erik Grafe, an attorney at environmental law firm Earthjustice, said the group is "committed to going to court as often as necessary to defend the Arctic Refuge from oil drilling and will work toward a more sustainable future that does not depend on ever-expanding oil extraction."
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said Grafe. "Oil drilling would destroy this beautiful land, held sacred by Gwich'in people, and would further destabilize the global climate, but it offers zero benefit to taxpayers or consumers."
Defenders of Wildlife called on Congress to repeal the 2017 tax law's mandate for leasing sales in the "iconic American landscape" of the Arctic Refuge.
"Turning the coastal plain into an oilfield will obliterate the pristine wilderness of the Arctic Refuge," said Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska senior program director for the group, "directly threatening the future of the Porcupine caribou herd and the physical, cultural, and spiritual existence of the Gwich'in people who depend on them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular