A government watchdog organization is beginning an investigation of Attorney General Merrick Garland for his threats of FBI investigations against public school parents across America who oppose leftist school board actions such as promotions of Critical Race Theory.
It immediately was reported that Garland’s son-in-law is the co-founder of a company that sells material that promotes that radical ideology in classrooms.
A report at Fox News explained America First legal has demanded information from the Department of Justice about Garland’s Oct. 4 memo against parents.
In it, he ordered DOJ’s National Security Division and the FBI to investigate “threatening” parents.
The organization is operating through a Freedom of Information Act request.
According to Fox News, “Garland’s directive has been criticized for politicizing DOJ because it came just days after a controversial letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to President Biden, suggesting that parents pushing back during school board meetings are engaging in ‘domestic terrorism.’ Now, Garland is also under increased scrutiny for his son-in-law’s ties to a company that backs CRT.”
Stephen Miller , a former adviser to President Donald Trump who founded America First Legal, said there are concerns about “ethical conflicts” when the attorney general is making statements on issues that affect his own family’s financial fortunes.
“AG Garland ordered the DOJ to use its vast national security powers to target parents who object to Critical Race Theory being forced onto innocent children. It is therefore exceptionally urgent that the Department disclose all records pertaining to the Garland family’s financial interest in Critical Race Theory and any and all ethical conflicts that arise from that financial interest,” Miller explained.
Garland’s daughter Rebecca married Xan Tanner in 2018. He helped start Panorama Education, which is linked to Facebook as Zuckerberg’s charitable arm gave $16 million to the company for “social-emotional” efforts.
“Accordingly, Mr. Tanner’s financial interest in a business that benefits from CRT and gender ideology indoctrination might render the attorney general’s participation in measures to promote or protect such activities, including the October 4, 2021 memorandum, ethically problematic,” the organization said.
WND previously reported a warning from prominent legal commentator Alan Dershowitz that Garland was improperly chilling Americans’ speech with his attack.
Garland’s statement essentially threatened parents who are opposing their local school boards’ leftist moves, such as promoting transgender ideology and Critical Race Theory discrimination, with FBI investigations.
“When dealing with protests, the Justice Department must be clear that the First Amendment fully protects all forms of protest, including raucous and unpleasant ones, and that generalized threats and nonviolent intimidation do not overcome this constitutional protection. Protesters must specifically threaten immediate violence against specific individuals. The Supreme Court has upheld vague, generalized advocacy of violence as protected by the First Amendment,” Dershowtiz wrote at the Gatestone Institute.
“The Garland memo fails to draw the appropriate First Amendment line and suggests that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies can appropriately investigate and ‘discourage’ generalized threats and ‘efforts to intimidate’ public officials. While the First Amendment errs on the side of protecting such wrongheaded protests, the Garland memo errs on the side of investigating and possibly prosecuting them.”
Garland’s memo cited a “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff….”
And while he admitted “spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution,” he then linked to the issue “illegal threats against these public officials.”
WND previously reported that Garland’s one-sided memo has generated considerable alarm across America, as well as criticism of him for a conflict of interest in his agenda.
While Garland cited threats against school boards, most such statements have focused on promised recall drives and such, while board members often have responded by calling for police to remove those parents from board meetings – or they simply shut down the meetings.
The issues include various board decisions to mandate COVID masks or vaccinations, transgender or homosexual indoctrination, and those CRT lessons.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.