U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Washington, D.C. 20530 April 13, 2018 Wendy R. Weiser Director, Democracy Program Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law weiserw@brennan.law.nyu.edu Re: FOIA Tracking No. FYl 7-218, FYl 7-270; Brennan Ctr. for Justice v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, S.D.N.Y. No. 17-:cv-6335 Dear Ms. Weiser: This letter constitutes a third and final response to your May 15, 2017 and July 25, 2017 Freedom oflnformationAct ("FOIA") requests on behalf of the Brennan Center for Justice and The Protect Democracy Project to the Office of Legal Counsel ("OLC"), seeking a variety of records "relating to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity or any other effort since November 8, 2016 to establish a commission, task force, or committee to study voter fraud or any aspect of the voting system." As you know, the requests have been assigned tracking numbers FYl 7-218 and FYl 7-270, and are also the subjects of the above-captioned litigation. You were provided a first response on December 29, 2017, which enclosed one responsive record, and a second response on March 30, 2018, which enclosed 226 pages of responsive records and informed you that 1,907 pages were withheld and 62 pages remained pending consultation with other entities. As part ofthat·consultation process, we have determined that a small number of additional pages previously withheld can be released in part. Accordingly, we have now processed the remaining 86 responsive pages. We are enclosing 41 pages ofresponsive records, with material redacted as exempt from disclosure pursuant to FOIA Exemptions Five, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5), and Six, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). The material redacted pursuant to Exemption Five is protected by the attorney-client and/or deliberative process privileges. Disclosure of the material redacted pursuant to Exemption Six would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. We have determined that none of the withheld material is appropriate for discretionary release. We have referred the remaining 45 pages of responsive records to the Office of Information Policy ("OIP" for direct response to you. OIP may be reached as follows: Douglas Hibbard, Chief, Initial Request Staff, Office of Information Policy,Department of Justice, Suite 11050, 1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20530, Tel: 202-514-3642. For your information, Congress excluded three discrete categories oflaw enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIA. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(c). This response is limited to those records that are subject to the requirements of the FOIA. This is a standard notification that is given to all our requesters and should not be taken as an indication that excluded records do, or do not, exist. You may contact the Office of Government Information Services ("OGIS") at the National Archives and Records Administration to inquire about the FOIA mediation services they offer. The contact information for OGIS is as follows : Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, Room 2510, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, Maryland 20740-6001, e-mail at ogis@nara.gov; telephone at 202-741-5770; toll free at 1-877-684-6448; or facsimile at 202-741-5769. Although your request is the subject of ongoing litigation, and administrative appeals are not ordinarily acted upon in such situations, I am required by statute and regulation to inform you of your right to file an administrative appeal. You may administratively appeal by writing to the Director, Office oflnformation Policy ("OIP"), United States Department of Justice, Suite 11050, 1425 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20530~0001 , or you may submit an appeal through OIP's FOIAonline portal by creating an account on th~ following web site: https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home. Your appeal must be postmarked or electronically transmitted within 90 days of the date of my response to your request. If you submit your appeal by mail, both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal." Your counsel may contact Assistant U.S. Attorney Casey Kyung-Se Lee, at Casey.Lee@usdoj.gov or at 212-637-2714, to discuss any aspect of your request. Sincerely, /iJ/!~ Paul P. Colborn Special Counsel Enclosures cc: Casey Kyung-Se Lee Southern District of New York Carl Wedoff Jenner & Block 2 Mann, James (CRM) From: Mann, James (CRM) Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 9:15 AM To: Hart, Rosemary (OLC} Subject: RE: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Thanks. From : Hart, Rosemary (OLC) Sent: Monday,April 24, 20179:14AM (b) (6) To: Mann, James (CRM) • > Subject: RE: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity From: Mann, James (CRM) Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 7:10 AM (b) (6) To: Hart, Rosemary (Ole) • Subject: Re: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Rosemary: ·· • • • • t . • • . • • -u . t (b) (6) duplicate Document ID: 0.7.14615.7537 duplicate Hart, Rosemary (OLC) From: Hart, Rosemary (OLC} Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5 :23 PM To: Wheeler, Tom (CRT) Subject: RE: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Tom: Thanks very much! Rosemary From: Wheeler, Tom (CRT) Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 5:20 PM (b)(6 ) To: Hart, Rosemary (OLC) • (b) (6) Cc: Wheeler, Tom (CRT) , > Subject: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Attached are our comments. Thanks. Tom Wheeler Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division United States Department of Justice Document ID: 0.7.14615.7672 Stewart, Scott (OLC) From: Stewart, Scott (OLC} Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:17 PM To: Gore, John (CRT); Hart, Rosemary (O l e) Cc: Wheeler, Tom (CRT); Troester, Robert J. (ODAG); Parker, Rachel (OASG) Subject: RE: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Thanks, John. We appreciate the prompt and helpf ul review. Best, Scott From: Gore, John (CRT) Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:06 PM (b) (6 ) To: Hart, Rosemary (OLC) • Cc: Wheeler, Tom (CRT} Stewart, Scott (OLC) . Troester, RobertJ. {ODAG) Parker, Rachel {OASG) • Subject: FW: Request for review of proposed Exe"Cutive Order on Election Integrity Rosemary: Tom Wheeler asked me to send along the attached comments from CRT. Thanks. Rosemary: Thanks. John M. Gore Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice lllllll:mmlll (b) (6 ) From: Toomey, Kathleen (CRT) Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 8:40 PM (b) (6 ) To: Gore, John (CRT) • (b)(6 ) Cc: Wheeler, Tom (CRT) • Subject: Fwd: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Please see below. Begin forwarded message: From: "Hart, Rosemary (OLC)" ~ -n _,. __ A_:; "l 1 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7162 'lf\1 ., - • .c. 1 '\ .'lA n '.ll,: e n,-, (b ) (6) (b )(6 ) units: A Ill 'dJ. duplicate Document ID: Hart, Rosemary (OLC) From: Hart, Rosemary (OLC} Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:26 PM To: Gore, John (CRT) Cc: Wheeler, Tom (CRT); Stewart, Scott (OLC); Troester, Robert J. (ODAG); Parker, Rachel (OASG) Subject : RE: Request for review of proposed Executive Order on Election Integrity Thanks very much, John. We' ll review and get back to you if we have any questions. Rosemary From: Gore, John (CRT) Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 2:06 PM Document ID: 0.7.14615.7368 duplicate Forrester, Nate (OLC) From: Forrester, Nate (OLC} Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2017 11:23 AM To: Wahdan, Rana S. (OLA) Subject: RE: DUE 12 PM TUESDAY- DAG QFRs from 6/13/17 House and Senate Appropriations Hearing Attachments: House OS Questions for the Record_Policy Comments.docx; Combined QFRs for 6-13-17 DOJ Senate Hearing_Policy Comments.docx Rana, similar question abom a subsequent Leahy question regarding our role in the EO creating the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Nathan A. Forrester Office of Lega l Counsel From: Forrester, Nate {OLC} Sent: Sunday, July 30, 201711:08 AM To: Wahdan, Rana S. {OLA) Subject: RE: DUE 12 PM TUESDAY - DAG QFRs f rom 6/ 13/ 17 House and Senate Appropriations Hearing Rana, (b) (5 ) ·- - Can we assume that we aren"t responsible for the parts of the QFR response flagged with our name in the body of the QFRs? Nathan A. Forrester Office of Lega l Counsel Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687 The Honorable Robert B. Aderholt Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Questions for the Record Department of Justice Budget Hearing Russia Investigation 1. (MAX Aderholt 1) What exactly is the scope of the Special Counsel’s investigation? Is it solely focused on the 2016 Trump campaign or is it also looking into any influence that Russia had on the Obama Administration and the 2016 Clinton campaign? Specifically, I understand from media reports that there is evidence that Sec. Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta, sat on the board of a Putin-connected energy company alongside Russian officials who received $35 million from a Putin-linked Russian government fund. And it has also been reported that Mr. Podesta did not fully disclose his ties to another energy company with ties to Russia back in 2014 when Mr. Podesta joined the White House as senior advisor. It seems only right that Special Counsel Robert Mueller take this opportunity to investigate the full scope of Russia’s influence on the election as well as any improper ties the previous Administration had to Russia. Conducting the investigation to be comprehensive in this way would help ensure that the investigation does not end up being a one-sided political witch hunt. (b) (5) 2. (MAX Aderholt 2) Russia, but also other countries, would like to influence our national elections. It has been reported that Russian hackers infiltrated data systems, such as campaign web sites, or maybe even county voter rolls during the 2016 election. It is my understanding from your appearance before this Committee that there is no evidence that hackers infiltrated voting machines or were able to change a single vote on November 8. Do you have follow-up advice or guidelines for county officials to ensure their software and hardware are safe for the next election? (b) (5) Oversite of PREA implementation by BOP and US Marshals In the last six months or so, there have been media accounts of at least two sexual assaults of people in DOJ custody. In December of last year, the Washington Post reported on a harrowing incident where a young man was sexually assaulted by another inmate while in US Marshals custody at the DC Courthouse. The Marshals charged with his protection had allegedly stepped away for lunch. The assailant pled guilty of first-degree sexual assault. The New York Times reported that just last month, two Bureau of Prisons lieutenants and a correctional officer were criminally charged with raping at least 9 female inmates in 2015 and 2016. All of these assaults were committed at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, NY. According to the Times, the two lieutenants were in charge of educating their colleagues on PREA. I know you share my outrage about these cases and strongly agree that anyone detained by the government has an absolute right to be free of sexual abuse. Yet, five years after the Bureau of Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 Prisons and Marshals service were charged with implementing the PREA standards, we still see crimes like these being committed or enabled by federal employees. 8. (MAX - Aderholt 8)Were the US Marshals on duty during the assault at the DC Courthouse disciplined? (b) (5) Violent Crime and Gangs Attorney General Sessions, I want to specifically thank you for the focus you are putting on violent crime and gangs, particularly MS-13. You have put MS-13 on notice that you are coming after them. 15. (MAX Aderholt 15) Could you please elaborate on the new Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety? What do you intend the Task Force to focus on? Will the DOJ partner with other Departments within the Administration, such as DHS? Is gang violence - and the specific nature of MS-13 as a transnational crime organization - a specific target of this Task Force (b) (5) 16. (MAX Aderholt 16) What are some of the outcomes of the recent National Summit on Crime reduction & public safety this week? I was pleased to see Birmingham, Alabama listed as one of the 12 cities that will be receiving additional assistance in fighting gun crime, drug trafficking and gang violence. Can you tell us more about this National Public Safety Partnership (PSP) and how these 12 cities will benefit from this new program (b) (5) 17. (MAX Aderholt 17) What is the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) Program doing related to the ongoing situation with MS-13 and other transnational gangs in the U.S.? Is there a need to expand the scope or mission of OCDETF to better address this problem (b) (5) Operation Choke Point During the Administration of President Obama, the Department of Justice coordinated a program called Operation Choke Point. In this program, the Department of Justice worked with banking regulators to utilize the full array of government powers, including subpoenas issued under FIRREA, to pressure banks to terminate relationships with certain customers. It appears that these businesses were legally operating, but may have been targeted due to having a different point of view than the Administration. Operation Choke Point deprived legal businesses of the banking operations needed to run their businesses and was, in effect, a program by which government shut down businesses without any due process. 18, (MAX Aderholt 18) Has the Department of Justice terminated Operation Choke Point? If not, can you get back to the Committee within 30 days to explain why not? Finally, can you inform this Committee about any other existing or planned Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 programs which operate with the goal of shutting down businesses without due process? (b) (5) The Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program facilities the training and coordination of law enforcement professionals across the country. In 2015, 61 coordinated task forces representing more than 3,500 federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies conducted more than 54,000 investigations that resulted in the arrest of more than 8,500 individuals in a broad coordinated effort to protect our nation’s children. The Department of Justice’s National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction in April of 2016 detailed numerous changes and evolving threats since the first Threat Assessment in the 2010 National Strategy mandated by the PROTECT Act of 2008. Globalization, the increasing use of mobile devices, encryption, the Dark Internet, organized offender communities, evolving types and means of exploitation, the use of social media to identify and recruit underage victims, increased gang involvement, and deliberate evasion of sex offender registries are all identified as evolving threats to children and to law enforcement’s ability to detect, deter, investigate, and prosecute criminal activity. Clearly, the threat of technology-enabled crimes against children continues to evolve. The 2016 National Strategy identifies targeting emerging technologies, targeting offender organizations, targeting high-value individual offenders, and increasing victim identification capacity through technology as investigative objectives for continuing the fight against child exploitation. Local, state, and federal law enforcement as well as the non-profit and private sector have contributed substantially to technology development to pace this evolving threat. However, as 2016 Strategy concludes, the Department forecasts a future of greater technological and global threats. Dedicated and sustained support from the Department is critical to this effort. 23. (MAX Aderholt 23) When does the Department plan on conducting another Threat Assessment in this area and when will it issue an updated National Strategy (b) (5) , ) The Honorable Martha Roby Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Questions for the Record Department of Justice FY 2018 Budget Request 1. (MAX Roby 1) As you are aware, the state of California has introduced a number of bills that would frustrate or impede the execution of federal immigration law in the state of California. It is the Subcommittee's understanding that the state of California's proposed Fiscal Year 2018 budget contains language that would prevent state, county or local authorities from detaining Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 illegal aliens for the purpose of civil immigration proceedings. What is the Department's response if such a measure becomes law in the state of California on June 15, 2017 (b) (5) 4. (MAX Roby 4) As you may be aware, certain sections of H.R. 2200, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, were sent over for the Department's assent. Is there an update you can share with me regarding the DOJ approval for the particular sections of H.R. 2200 DOJ was asked to review? (b) (5) ******************Insert Serrano**************** The Honorable Derek Kilmer Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Questions for the Record Department of Justice FY 2018 Budget Request 1. (MAX Kilmer 1) Earlier this month, Senators Grassley and Feinstein sent the President a letter expressing concern over the Administration’s policy to not respond to members of Congress in the minority party. Senator Grassley noted in this letter that “[u]nless Congress explicitly tells the Executive Branch to withhold information based on committee membership or leadership position, there is no legal or Constitutional basis for the Executive Branch to do so. For OLC to so fundamentally misunderstand and misstate such a simple fact exposes its shocking lack of professionalism and objectivity.” The letter also explicitly states that the Administration's policy “harms not just the Members who happen to be in the minority party at the moment, but also, Members in the majority On May 11th, Ranking Members Serrano and Lowey wrote a letter to Attorney General Sessions, you were copied as well, with several questions regarding the firing of FBI director Comey and his request for additional resources. No response has even been received. party who are not currently Chairmen.” a. Did the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General have any role in crafting the OLC’s policy not to respond to oversight requests from the members in the minority? If yes, what role did the Attorney General and/or Deputy Attorney General play in crafting this policy? (b) (5) b. Has the Department of Justice or the White House directed any agency not to respond to an inquiry from a Member of Congress (b) (5) c. What is the policy at the Department with regard to responses to congressional inquiries (b) (5) Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 d. More specifically, is there a policy or guidance that would prohibit or delay responses to Ranking Members of Congressional Committees or subcommittees of jurisdiction? (b) (5) e. Is there a policy or guidance that would prohibit or delay responses to Democratic Members of Congress? (b) (5) 2. (MAX Kilmer 4) Washington State, where I’m from, legalized marijuana in 2013. former Deputy Attorney General James Cole issued a memo which outlined the In 2013, Department’s cannabis enforcement policies. The Cole Memo identified eight federal enforcement priorities with respect to cannabis, and noted that “[o]utside of these enforcement priorities, the federal government has traditionally relied on states and local law enforcement agencies to address marijuana activity through enforcement of their own narcotics laws.” It was recently announced that the Attorney General formed a Task Force to review the Department’s cannabis enforcement policies. In recent years, Congress’ appropriations bills have reflected priorities of the Cole Memo. For example, the FY 2017 Omnibus Appropriations Act prohibits the federal government from using funds in order to prevent states from implementing their own cannabis laws. a. Does the Department have any plans to update or rescind the Cole Memo? If yes, what is the Department’s strategy for integrating feedback from the Appropriations Committee? (b) (5) b. Is the Department’s cannabis enforcement policy consistent with Section 537 of the FY 2017 Omnibus appropriations bill, which prohibits the Department from using any funds made available to it to prevent any states from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana (b) (5) c. How is the Department’s longstanding policy to leave lower-level and localized marijuana activity to state and local authorities impacted by your recent directive to federal prosecutors to seek the maximum sentence allowed under law for drug crimes (b) (5) 3. (MAX Kilmer 5) In February 2017, the Attorney General Commissioned a Task Force to review and issue recommendations on various Department of Justice policies. The policies being reviewed include the Department’s policy on marijuana. The Attorney General’s memo indicated that the Department will continue to act on recommendations as they become available. Have any of these recommendations on marijuana policy become available, and have they influenced the President’s Budget request (b) (5) 4. (MAX Kilmer 6) As you know, the Department of Justice’s COPS program helps keep our communities safe by putting more law enforcement officers on our streets, and providing law Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 enforcement and communities with resources to pursue collaborative policing initiatives. One of these successful community policing initiatives can be found in Tacoma, Washington, which I represent. In 2015, the City of Tacoma launched Project P.E.A.C.E. to work on building and improving the relationship between the police department and our community members. Project P.E.A.C.E. has been a great success – so much so that the Tacoma Police Department has continued this initiative on its own by expanding and adding formal structure to many programs to help create safer neighborhoods and foster a higher level of community engagement. Other communities are also engaging in these important dialogues to foster productive relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they serve. a. Does the Department support de-escalation and crisis intervention training for law enforcement officers (b) (5) b. Does the Department support implicit bias training for law enforcement officers? (b) (5) 5. (MAX Kilmer 9) In April 2017, a federal district court found that Texas’s strict voter photo ID requirement was enacted purposefully to discriminate against Black and Latino voters. The Department of Justice had taken the position that Texas’s law was intentionally discriminatory and challenged the law Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. One of the Attorney General’s first decisions was to abandon the Department’s claim of intentional discrimination in its lawsuit against Texas. a. Why did the Justice Department abandon the intentional discrimination claim? (b) (5) b. Do you plan to withdraw from, or change positions in, any other pending voting rights litigation (b) (5) 6. (MAX Kilmer 10) In May 2017, President Trump issued an executive order that established the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. a. What role did the Attorney General and/or the Deputy Attorney General have advising on the creation of this Commission or the drafting of this Executive Order (b) (5) b. Will the Department commit to not spending any of its resources on the operation of the Commission, including but not limited to, providing facilities or office space, funding for staff or facilities, travel expenses, or other costs associated with the commission (b) (5) c. The Commission’s vice chair is Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who joined the president in estimating that “3.2 million aliens voted in the president election.” Do you have any evidence that 3.2 million aliens voted in the presidential election (b) (5) Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 d. How will the Department ensure that the Commission is not used to justify voter suppression tactics (b) (5) 7. (MAX Kilmer 12) The COPS Office was created as part of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, and has distributed more than $14 billion in grants. In addition to providing direct funding to police agencies, the office has supported law enforcement studies and collaborative reform efforts to bring about change in local police departments, including by helping police leaders with reviewing their policies and practices and making recommendations for improving community-police relations. Police leaders and local elected officials often request technical assistance from the COPS Office. For example, in May 2016, the Mayor and Police Chief of North Charleston, SC asked the COPS office for a collaborative assessment of the North Charleston Police Department. a. Will the Department continue to support local law enforcement by responding to their requests for technical assistance by continuing to fund the COPS Office to undertake this type of assessment? (b) (5) b. Will the Department release the assessment of the North Charleston Police Department (b) (5) 8. (MAX Kilmer 15) On April 5, 2017, the Attorney General sent a memo to Department of Justice leaders and U.S. Attorneys updating them on the status of the Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety, which was created by Executive Order. The purpose of the Task Force is “to identify ways in which the federal government can more effectively combat illegal immigration and violent crime, such as gun crime, drug trafficking, and gang violence.” In the memo, you stated that the Task Force will host a National Summit on Crime Reduction and Public Safety to “learn from federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies, victims’ advocacy organizations, and community advocacy organizations about how we can best support and replicate successful local violent crime reduction efforts.” a. (Kilmer 15b) Where will the National Summit occur and who will be invited to participate? (b) (5) b. (Kilmer 15c) What efforts will the Task Force make to open the National Summit to members of the public? Will the Task Force accept testimony and/or comments from the public (b) (5) 9. (MAX – Kilmer 23) Far too many state and local jurisdictions fail to file voluntary reports pursuant to the Hate Crime Statistics Act—or they submit reports reflecting an incredibly low number of hate crimes for their jurisdiction. This means that the annual FBI hate crimes reports, while very useful, likely underreports the numbers of hate crimes, possibly Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 disproportionately underreports certain types of hate crimes, and may not give an accurate sense of the geographic distribution of such crimes. Accurate information is essential to understanding the problem and to developing appropriate responses. How does the Department plan to secure more widespread and accurate responses, and what will you do to make sure that complete accurate reporting of hate crimes is a priority for the Department? (b) (5) The Honorable Matt Cartwright Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Questions for the Record Department of Justice FY 2018 Budget Request 1. (MAX Cartwright 1) Like all Americans, I was concerned to learn that our nation’s intelligence agencies determined that Russia carried out a campaign to sabotage the 2016 election. Our intelligence agencies concluded, with a high level of certainty, that Russia took unprecedented steps to effect the outcome of the 2016 election. I think everyone, on both sides of the aisle, can agree that we must learn from the past and do everything we can to protect the integrity of future elections. With the next federal elections less than 18 months away, what are the major steps and actions by DOJ would be appropriate if faced with incontrovertible evidence of foreign interference after the 2018 elections? (b) (5) 2. (MAX Cartwright 2) In a recent opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel concluded that individual Members of Congress do not have the right to conduct oversight of the executive branch. According to this opinion, when an individual member of Congress, someone who is not a chair of a committee or subcommittee, requests information from the Justice Department, for example, the department has no constitutional obligation to respond. Since the beginning of this year my colleagues in the minority have sent many letters and requests to the administration that have gone unanswered, including 7 letters to the Department of Justice alone. Does your Department intend to respond to their questions? What message does it send about the accountability of this administration and its interest in being open, transparent, and looking to work with Congress if you are declaring you are free from the responsibility of even answering letters from duly elected members of Congress (b) (5) 3. (MAX Cartwright 6) According to the Centers for Disease Control, Pennsylvania saw 3,264 drug overdose deaths in 2015, an increase of 532 over 2014. The opioid epidemic is devastating communities and families across the country and my district. I am proud of the work that Congress has done through bipartisan legislation to help our communities prevent overdose deaths, treat addiction, and prosecute drug dealers. The administration is proposing to fund drug enforcement robustly. However, this budget contains enormous cuts to Medicare, a $400 million cut to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, hundreds of millions in cuts to mental health block grants, and billions in cuts altogether to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Food and Drug Administration Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 (FDA). With all of these cuts there will be dramatically less treatment available. Would you characterize the administration’s approach to the Opioid epidemic as a law and order, incarceration focus? Do you think it might be a more productive approach to help people address their addictions and recover and return to being productive members of society (b) (5) The Honorable Grace Meng Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Questions for the Record Department of Justice FY 2018 Budget Request 1) (MAX Cartwright 1) Last year, the Obama Administration committed to phasing-out the use of private prisons by the U.S. federal government. When outlining this new policy, Deputy Attorney General Yates cited the following basis for the decision: (1) a decreasing prison population; (2) private prisons a do not provide the same level of correctional services, programs, and resources; (3) private prisons do not save substantially on costs; and (4) findings from a DOJ Office of Inspector General report that states private prisons do not maintain the same level of safety and security. One of the first acts Attorney General Sessions performed was to reverse this policy. Why did the Department choose to reverse course and recommit to the use of private prisons? (b) (5) 2) (MAX Cartwright 2) Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, have you or Attorney General Sessions, now, or have you ever, owned stock in any publicly traded private prison company (b) (5) 3) (MAX Cartwright 3) In contracts that the federal government enters into with private prisons, it generally guarantees that a certain percentage of cells will be filled with prisoners. How does the federal government guarantee that a certain number of Americans will be imprisoned each and every year? Are you concerned that this creates a public policy incentive for law enforcement agencies to actually increase recidivism? (b) (5) Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000001 UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies ________________________________ QFRs: U.S. Department of Justice Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein Hearing Date: June 13, 2017 Senators Coons, Feinstein, Lankford, Leahy, Manchin, Schatz, Shaheen, Shelby, Van Hollen 1 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Senator Coons Review of the FY2018 Budget Request for the U.S. Department of Justice Questions for the Record for Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein 1. (MAX – Coons 1) During his January 10 confirmation hearing, Attorney General Jeff Sessions stated that he would recuse himself from any matters involving the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s email server. A transcript of the hearing is available at http://www.cq.com/doc/congressionaltranscripts-5017061?1&search=VDHxVWc4. a. Are you aware of Attorney General Sessions’ recusal regarding any matters involving the investigation into former Secretary Clinton’s email server (b) (5) b. When did that recusal become effective? (b) (5) c. What is the scope of Attorney General Sessions’ recusal regarding any matters involving the investigation into former Secretary Clinton’s email server (b) (5) / 2. (Max – Coons 2) The Trump Administration’s original stated reason for removing Director Comey was his conduct relating to the Clinton email investigation. Why did Attorney General Sessions participate in this matter when he told Congress he would recuse himself? (b) (5) 3. (Max Coons 3) Are you aware of any actions by the Attorney General that would suggest participation in matters from which he is recused? (b) (5) 4. (Max Coons 4) Has the Department of Justice assessed the longer-term budgetary impacts of forcing prosecutors to charge even low-level offenders with the most serious offense possible? (b) (5) 5. (MAX Coons 6) During your time as United States Attorney for Maryland, how many times did you directly speak with the President of the United States? (b) (5) a. If conversations occurred, what did you discuss during those conversations (b) (5) 6. (MAX Coons 7) Since being confirmed as Deputy Attorney General, how many times have you had private, one-on-one conversations with President Trump, in person or over the phone? (b) (5) a. If conversations occurred, what did you discuss during those conversations (b) (5) 7. (MAX Coons 8) In my questions for the record during your confirmation hearing, I asked if it was ever appropriate for the President or another White House official to contact the Department of Justice or the FBI with instructions on how to conduct an ongoing criminal investigation. You answered, “Any contacts from the President or the White House must comply with Department policies, including a 2009 memorandum by Attorney General Eric Holder. It would 2 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 be my responsibility to ensure that investigations comply with Department policies, and that partisan considerations do not influence the handling of particular cases.” Director Comey testified before the Intelligence Committee that he believed President Trump directed him to stop the FBI’s ongoing investigation into General Michael Flynn. What have you done to ensure that the President’s actions do not influence ongoing cases (b) (5) 8. (MAX Coons 9) In my questions for the record during your confirmation hearing, I asked how you would ensure that there is no political interference with regard to any investigation into Russian interference. You answered, “I will follow and enforce applicable policies and procedures prohibiting political interference.” Please detail what procedures you are following and enforcing (b) (5) 9. (MAX Coons 10) How has the Department of Justice implemented and enforced the Death in Custody Reporting Act and the FBI National Use of Force database (b) (5) 10. (MAX Coons 11) Then-President-elect Trump claimed that millions of people voted illegally in the presidential election. a. Do you believe there should be an investigation into alleged instances of voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election (b) (5) b. If so, on what information do you base that belief (b) (5) Senator Feinstein Questions for the Record from Senator Dianne Feinstein Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies June 13, 2017 Question 1: White House Contacts Former FBI Director Comey testified on June 8, 2017 before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that on at least four occasions, President Trump contacted the former FBI Director to ask him about the Russia investigation. 1. (MAX Feinstein)Were you aware of President Trump’s calls to Director Comey before Director Comey testified about them? (If so, how and when did you learn about any of these conversations? What did you know about each discussion? (b) (5) 2. (MAX Feinstein)Has President Trump ever contacted you regarding the Russia investigation? (If so, when and what was discussed? (b) (5) 3. (MAX Feinstein) Are you aware of any other Justice Department officials whom the President has contacted regarding the Russia investigation? (If so, who did the President contact and when did that occur? (b) (5) 3 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Question 2: Responding to Congressional (Minority) Requests On May 1, 2017, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a letter opinion for the counsel to the president titled “Authority of Individual Members of Congress to Conduct Oversight of the Executive Branch.” In that letter opinion, the OLC took the position that “individual members of Congress, including ranking minority members, do not have the authority to conduct oversight in the absence of a specific delegation by a full house, committee, or subcommittee.” According to the Office of Legal Counsel, the executive branch is not obligated to answer my requests or those of my Democratic colleagues. This is unacceptable. As elected officials of a co-equal branch of government, we have constitutional authority to conduct oversight of the executive branch. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Is it your view that the Administration has no legal obligation to respond to requests that do not come from a committee chairman? (b) (5) During your confirmation process, you said that you would “make every effort to answer [our] questions fully and quickly.” 2. (MAX Feinstein ) Do you still intend to do so? If not, why not? What changed (b) (5) / 3. (MAX Feinstein) Will you make sure that all components of the Justice Department are instructed to answer requests from Congress, even those that are not from a committee chairman? (If not, why not? (b) (5) Question 3: Emoluments Lawsuits President Trump has been sued for possible violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which prohibits federal officeholders from accepting gifts or payments from foreign and US governments. (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Donald J. Trump, No. 17 Civ. 458, SDNY (2017).) The Justice Department is defending the President in this suit. This case raises a number of novel questions, including how to interpret and apply the emoluments clauses of the Constitution and the import of the President’s refusal to divest his business holdings prior to taking office. The Department of Justice represents the United States – not any single person or party – and it is important to ensure that the Department is not elevating President Trump’s personal interests over those of the country. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Is there an independent team of career lawyers within the Department who have been assigned to determine and present the position of the United States, apart from that of the President (b) (5) a. If not, why not? 4 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 b. If so, who does this team report to and how is their view being presented to the court? 2. (MAX Feinstein) What has been done to determine whether there are conflicts between the best interests of President Trump and those of the United States? How are any conflicts being resolved (b) (5) 3. (MAX Feinstein) The foreign emoluments clause prohibits the acceptance of presents, emoluments, offices or titles “without the consent of Congress.” How is the Justice Department accounting for the interests of Congress in these lawsuits? (b) (5) 4. (MAX Feinstein) Please private lawyers. (b) (5) / explain why this suit is not being handled by President Trump’s 5. (MAX Feinstein) Have you recused yourself from this lawsuit? (If not, why not have you obtained the opinion of Department ethics experts? (b) (5) – and 6. (MAX Feinstein) Has Attorney General Sessions recused himself from the lawsuit (If not, why not and has he obtained the opinion of Department ethics experts? (b) (5) Question 4: Role in Comey Firing You acknowledged when you briefed the Senate on May 18, 2017 (and the House on May 19) that you knew the President was going to fire Director Comey when you wrote your May 9 memo about Director Comey’s public mishandling of the Clinton email investigation. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Did you tell the President to fire Director Comey (b) (5) 2. (MAX Feinstein) Why did you agree to write the memo knowing that the President had already made the decision to fire Director Comey (b) (5) 3. (MAX Feinstein) Did you ever discuss Director Comey’s handling of the Russia investigation, including investigation of Michael Flynn, with the President? With White House Counsel Don McGahn? If so, when did these conversations take place (b) (5) Question 5: Appointment of Special Counsel Mueller On May 17, 2017, you appointed Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to conduct the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including any links/and or coordination between the Russian government and Trump campaign as well as “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” (Office of the Deputy Attorney General, 5 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Order No. 3915-2017, May 17, 2017) The order that you signed appointing Mr. Mueller makes him subject to 28 CFR §§ 600.4 through 600.10. 28 CFR 600.7(b) makes clear that Mr. Mueller “shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department.” It does not otherwise explain, however, who, when, and under what circumstances Mr. Mueller will report to or discuss the investigation with Department officials. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Who does Mr. Mueller report to and under what circumstances? (b) (5) 2. (MAX Feinstein) What is your role with regard to the Special Counsel? For example, Section 600.7(b) authorizes you -- because of the Attorney General’s recusal -- to request an explanation of “any investigative or prosecutorial step.” What is the process for requesting these explanations, and how are the requests and explanations documented (b) (5) 28 CFR 600.9(a)(3) requires notification to Congress of “instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Department practices that it should not be pursued.” The regulations require this notification at the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s investigation. 3. (MAX Feinstein) If Special Counsel Muller does not object on the grounds that earlier disclosure would adversely affect legitimate investigative or privacy concerns, will you commit to notifying Congress within 30 days (rather than only at the close of the overall investigation) of any instances that trigger this reporting requirement (b) (5) Question 7: The Dark Web and Drug Trafficking Last weekend, the New York Times ran a tragic piece about the use of the dark web by drug traffickers and other criminal enterprises to secretly do business with users. The problem of criminals using the “dark web” to conceal their tracks and traffic their goods is a problem that is only going to grow in the coming years. 1. (MAX Feinstein) How do does the Department plan to address the use of the dark web to apprehend and stop those who are engaged in criminal activity (b) (5) 6 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Question 8: Hate Crimes Prioritization Last month, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing regarding religious hate crimes. The hearing highlighted the alarming spike in hate crime incidents since the election last year, including the notable increase in white supremacist hate groups. The Justice Department attorney who testified at that hearing committed to taking federal action to aggressively prosecute hate crimes. I have heard concerns that witnesses, and victims themselves, are reluctant to come forward to assist in hate crimes investigations because of some of the rhetoric that the President and this Administration have used. 1. (MAX Feinstein) What is your strategy to make sure that all witnesses and victims feel safe in reporting hate crimes and other crimes that DOJ is in charge of investigating and prosecuting? (b) (5) The FBI has collected data on hate crimes since 1990 when Congress passed the Hate Crime Statistics Act. However, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the FBI’s tally is incomplete, which prevents us from understanding the scope and scale of the problem. While the FBI typically reports 7,000 to 10,000 hate crimes, the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that the true number may approach 300,000, which is approximately 30 times the FBI estimation. As the Bureau of Justice Statistics report also indicates, the percentage of religiously motivated hate crimes nearly tripled between 2004 and 2012. 2. How is DOJ working to account for these discrepancies so that there is more accurate reporting? (b) (5) The number of law enforcement agencies reporting their hate crimes statistics to the FBI seems to be decreasing. In 2015, more than 3,000 law enforcement agencies did not provide hate crimes data to the FBI, an increase of 500 non-reporting agencies from 2014. 3. What do you intend to do to make it easier for local agencies to report this crucial data to the FBI (b) (5) I 4. What do you think would foster more accurate and complete reporting from local police to the FBI (b) (5) 5. What do you think would foster more accurate and complete reporting of hate crimes by victims (b) (5) 7 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Question 9: SCAAP Mr. Rosenstein, the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) is a critical source of reimbursements for county sheriffs in California who incur costs due to detaining convicted criminal aliens. Given the rhetoric from this Administration related to immigration, I was particularly surprised to see that your budget proposed eliminating this critical program – and that you’re asking already stretched local jurisdictions to pay to house individuals charged with immigration violations 1. – which is the responsibility of the federal government. Given the Administration’s prioritization of combatting immigration crimes, why does your budget propose to eliminate federal support for local communities through the SCAAP program and essentially create a new unfunded mandate? (b) (5) Question 10: Human Trafficking and Injunction Authority While significant attention has been paid to the supply side of human trafficing (breaking up trafficking rings, monitoring websites like Backpage, and rescuing girls), I am concerned that we are still not doing enough to reduce the demand, and address the problem of trafficking over the internet. 1. What is your strategy to address human trafficking over the internet (b) (5) 2. If trafficking laws were updated to include civil injunction authority to allow DOJ to bring civil cases against traffickers to prevent them from trafficking young victims, will you commit to using such authority? (b) (5) Question 13: Appropriations Gun Riders Year after year, the bills produced by this Subcommittee and its House counterpart include a number of policy riders that limit the federal government’s ability to enforce existing gun laws. These provisions do everything from limiting ATF’s ability to make commonsense updates to its definitions, to requiring sellers to report suspicious transactions, to properly classifying dangerous ammunition. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Can you describe how these appropriations riders impact your Department’s ability to protect public safety (b) (5) 2. (MAX Feinstein) How can you actually enforce existing laws when Congress puts all of these obstacles in your way (b) (5) 8 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Question 14: Marijuana Enforcement Twenty-nine states and the District of Colombia have legalized medical or recreational marijuana. I sent a letter on March 2, 2017 to Attorney General Sessions requesting clarification on whether the Department intends to continue the policies contained in the Cole Memorandum, which outlines eight federal enforcement areas related to marijuana. Unfortunately, I have yet to receive a response to this letter. 1. Does the Department intend to revise policies related to federal marijuana enforcement? If so, how and when? (b) (5) 2. When can I expect to receive a response to the letter I sent to the Department in March? (b) (5) Question 16: Illegal Marijuana Grows on Public Lands Mr. Rosenstein, I have heard from numerous rural counties and tribes about increasing incidents of illegal marijuana grows on public and tribal lands that are attracting criminal activity and creating environmental hazards. The problem is particularly acute for California communities that border National Parks and Forests as well as for tribes with limited law enforcement capabilities. I am particularly concerned by reports that much of this activity is driven by foreign drug cartels, particularly from Mexico. 1. I ask that you direct the DEA to work more closely with local communities and tribes in order to crack down on illegal marijuana grows on public lands, particularly in rural areas of states that have legalized recreational marijuana, like California (b) (5) Question 18: Sanctuary Cities/Byrne JAG as penalty Since the transition, President Trump has threatened to withhold a state or city’s entire Byrne JAG and COPS Hiring Grants allocation as penalty for sanctuary policies that go beyond what the law requires. Indeed, the FY18 budget request proposes punitive penalties to law enforcement funding if state and local law enforcement do not comply with policies that go beyond even what the law requires with respect to immigration laws. 1. How does the Department reconcile its support for state and local law enforcement with its proposal to withhold Byrne JAG and COPS funds in penalty? (b) (5) 9 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Question 21: Voting Rights and Voter Suppression After your nomination hearing in March, I submitted a number of questions to you about voting rights and voter fraud. Specifically, I asked if you believe there is credible evidence that over 2.5 million people voted illegally in the last election, and I asked what steps you would take to ensure strong voting rights enforcement continues. You responded to the first question that you were “not aware of the context or basis for the [President’s] remarks and therefore [you were] not in a position to comment.” You also pledged to “fairly, effectively and appropriately enforce voting rights laws and other laws within the Department’s jurisdiction.” 1. Are you now in a position to comment on whether there is credible evidence that over 2.5 million people voted illegally in the last election (b) (5) 2. If not, will you commit to obtaining the information that you need to answer this question and to doing so by July 31, 2017? (b) (5) 3. Since becoming Deputy Attorney General, what steps have you taken to ensure that strong voting rights enforcement has continued (b) (5) In the time since you submitted your responses to my questions on voting rights, President Trump has established a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The Administration claims the purpose of this Commission is “to promote fair and honest Federal elections.” The Department also released a Fiscal Year 2018 Budget and Performance Summary. The “FY 2018 Strategy” for the Civil Rights Division states the following with respect to voting rights: “The Department will continue to protect voting rights through efforts to detect and investigate voting practices that violate federal laws, through affirmative litigation to enjoin such practices, and through the monitoring of elections all throughout the country each year.” The FY 2018 Strategy makes no reference to investigating allegations of voter suppression or to ensuring that all of those eligible to vote are not disenfranchised. 4. Were you consulted by President Trump or anyone in the Trump Administration about the establishment of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity (b) (5) 5. In light of the Justice Department’s resources and expertise, do you believe that this Commission is necessary “to promote fair and honest Federal elections” (b) (5) 6. What role did you play in drafting the FY 2018 Strategy for the Civil Rights Division? (b) (5) 7. What role did Rachel Brand play in drafting the FY 2018 Strategy for the Civil Rights Division? (b) (5) 10 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Senator Lankford Senator James Lankford Questions for the Record Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies A review of the President’s Fiscal Year 2018 funding request and budget justification for the U.S. Department of Justice June 13, 2017 1. On May 4, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order to direct the Attorney General to issue guidance interpreting religious liberty protections in Federal law. What are some of the religious freedom issues you see that the federal government should address? What is the timeframe for when this guidance will be issued (b) (5) 2. In August 2016, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) announced plans to end its use of private prisons. However, Attorney General Sessions rescinded this policy and directed BOP “to return to its previous approach.” Are all private facilities that were previously in use being used again? Do you believe that all such facilities are proper for housing our federal inmates (b) (5) Senator Leahy May 1, 2017, OLC Memo On May 1, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion asserting that the Department is under no legal obligation to respond to oversight requests from minority members of Congress. The opinion indicates that responding to requests from individual members of Congress, including Ranking Minority members, is discretionary. This is a flawed opinion and falls grossly short of the Departments responsibilities to Congress. Senator Grassley aptly described the memo as “nonsense.” 1. Will you rescind the May 1, 2017, OLC memo? (b) (5) Forensics I have long been concerned about the state of forensic science in the United States, and am eager – our courts, law enforcement, forensic laboratories, prosecutors, defendants, and all other stakeholders – have the strongest and most reliable tools to to ensure that our criminal justice system use in the pursuit of justice. This is an area where the Department of Justice has a critical role to play. I hope this issue will be a priority, despite the Attorney General not renewing the charter of 11 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 the National Commission on Forensic Science. The Attorney General has indicated he will appoint a Senior Forensic Advisor. 1. Have you determined who will be appointed to lead the Department’s forensic science work? (b) (5) 2. Is there a timeline (b) (5) 3. If no individual has been appointed, will the Department commit to seek meaningful input on the selection from relevant stakeholders in the forensic science community, including scientists, crime lab leaders, law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, and defense lawyers (b) (5) Bureau of Prisons Second Chance Act: The Administration’s proposal reduces Second Chance Act grants that help government agencies and nonprofit groups provide employment assistance, substance abuse treatment, housing, and family counseling for those who have been released from prison by 25 percent. These programs reduce recidivism rates and thus help to lower prison populations. 1. Do you believe reducing the prison population in the United States is a worthy goal for the Department of Justice (b) (5) 2. Does the Justice Department plan to allocate any other resources to reducing the prison population? If so, through what programs? If not, why? . (b) (5) Fighting Violent Crime: The Department of Justice requests $19 million to implement the recommendations of the Attorney General’s Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety. From what I understand, the Task Force has met only once for an introductory meeting. 1. What, if any, recommendations has the Task Force put forward? (b) (5) 12 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 2. If the recommendations are not yet finalized, how did the Department or Administration arrive at the $19 million figure? (b) (5) 3. How will the Task Force move forward on these recommendations, and when can we expect those final recommendations (b) (5) 4. The Attorney General has already made decisions that will have a significant impact on our criminal justice system and prison population without input from the Task Force, such as rescinding the Obama Administration’s Smart on Crime policy. What role will the Task Force play in the Department’s decision making (b) (5) FBI Headquarters The FY 2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act included $323 million, which is half of what the FBI requested in FY 2017 to consolidate the FBI headquarters. It also provided $200 million to GSA for the project. However, the Trump administration’s budget proposal neither funds the other half of the FBI’s or GSA’s request nor rescinds the FY 2017 headquarter funding. With the lack of full funding in FY 2017 and no requested funds in FY 2018, no contract may be awarded for the project and the FBI and GSA cannot announce a location. The project could be stalled until FY 2019 or even cancelled without sufficient resources. Not only could this cost American taxpayers upwards of $150 million in total, preventable damages if the bidders file protest lawsuits, but would also leave the FBI workforce currently dispersed throughout the National Capital region without the operational work environment necessary for the FBI to be successful in performing its national security, intelligence, and criminal investigative missions. 1. Is the new FBI headquarters project still a priority for the Department of Justice in FY 2018 (b) (5) 2. If the new FBI headquarters remains a priority for the Department, does the President intend to submit a budget amendment to Congress to request those funds in FY 2018? (b) (5) Voting Rights The President’s May 11, 2017, Executive Order created a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Rather than protecting the right to vote in this country this commission seems 13 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 directed at finding cases of voter fraud and impersonation which are very rare and much less common than voter disenfranchisement through strict voter ID laws. 1. What role did you and other Justice Department employees play in writing the May 11 Executive Order? (b) (5) 2. 3. Were career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division consulted? If not, why (b) (5) / The Executive Order says the commission “shall have staff to provide support for its functions.” Has the Justice Department provided any staff to work full- or part-time for the commission (b) (5) 4. Do you think the rare incidences of voter fraud and impersonation merit the creation of this commission (b) (5) Senator Manchin 1. Gangs. Gangs, including the notorious MS-13, have increased their activity in recent months and are now operating out of almost every state, including rural states such as West Virginia. 1. What can Congress do to best support the Department in its efforts to crack down on gang activity and street crime (b) (5) 2. Bureau of Prisons Staffing and Correctional Officer Safety West Virginia houses several federal prisons, including FCI Beckley, FCI Gilmer, FCI Hazelton, FCI McDowell, FCI Morgantown, and USP Hazelton. Correctional officers who work at these prisons place their lives on the line to protect public safety, and I am proud of the work that they do. Over the past year, I have heard disturbing reports of understaffing at federal prisons in West Virginia and across the country that have left correctional officers vulnerable to attack by the inmates in their charge. My concern was heightened when I learned that the Department of Justice plans to maintain a hiring freeze for the Bureau of Prisons—even though the 14 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 administration has specifically exempted from the scope of the hiring freeze all positions that protect the public safety. 1. Can you tell us about the Departm ent’s position on the use of augmentation? Does the Department believe that the use of augmentation is in line with its own goals for public safety and the safety of its correctional officers (b) (5) 2. Does the Department have any immediate plans to nominate a permanent Director to oversee the Bureau of Prisons (b) (5) Senator Schatz 1. What is the scope of Attorney General (AG) Sessions’ recusal? What matters is he allowed to be involved in? Please be as specific as possible (b) (5) 2. Who determines what matters the AG is allowed to be involved in (b) (5) 3. What procedures are in place to ensure that the AG is excluded from matters within the scope of his recusal (b) (5) 4. In the event that a matter were to reach the AG that falls within the scope of his recusal, what are the procedures for correcting the issue and maintaining the independence of the investigation (b) (5) 5. What are the procedures for monitoring the AG’s compliance with his recusal for matters that may reach him outside the proper channels at the Department of Justice (DOJ) (b) (5) 6. Is the AG recused from all matters that are currently or will be under investigation by the special counsel (b) (5) 7. Do you commit to informing Congress in the event that the recusal is breached? (b) (5) 8. Are there staff that work for AG Sessions who are also recused from any investigation related to the presidential election (b) (5) 9. How will their recusal be overseen and enforced (b) (5) 10. Will AG Sessions continue to have managerial responsibilities over attorneys, staff, or other officials within DOJ who are or will work on investigations from which the AG has recused (b) (5) 11. Has anyone from DOJ informed the president and his staff about proper procedures for their communications with the AG and his staff to ensure compliance with the recusal (b) (5) 15 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Senator Shaheen Department of Justice Hiring 1. Does DOJ consider BOP a component of public safety? Why is the BOP not exempt from the DOJ hiring freeze? (b) (5) Senator Shelby Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility Mr. Deputy Attorney General, since 2009 Congress has consistently – on a bipartisan basis – prohibited the closure of the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. This Subcommittee once again included two prohibitions in the fiscal year 2017 spending bill restricting the transfer and housing of these terrorist detainees on U.S. soil. And yet, in a statement issued by the President upon signing the 2017 Omnibus into law, he raised concerns about these specific provisions and, in doing so, raised questions about his future direction on Guantanamo Bay detainees. The Attorney General has previously supported federal laws that prohibit the transfer of terrorist detainees from Guantanamo to U.S. soil. 1. How would you and the Attorney General advise the President if his administration explored closing the Guantanamo prison and transferring terrorist detainees to American soil (b) (5) Senator Van Hollen Special Counsel 1. 28 CFR Part 600.7, Conduct and Accountability, states that “The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” Do you believe that an order from the President to fire the Special Counsel constitute s “good cause” (b) (5) 2. Do you believe that the Constitution implicitly grants sitting presidents immunity from criminal prosecution (b) (5) 3. Department of Justice regulations authorize the Attorney General to “request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step.” How 16 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 frequently will you ask the special counsel to report to you on his investigation? To what extent will you require the special counsel to coordinate with the Justice Department’s National Security Division (b) (5) 4. What will be the process for reporting the progress and results of the Special Counsel’s investigation to Congress (b) (5) 5. Will you report to the Special Counsel any efforts by any member of the Trump Administration to impede the investigation of the Special Counsel (b) (5) 6. Did you get any pressure from AG Sessions, McGahn, or anyone else not to appoint a special counsel (b) (5) 7. Has President Trump -- or any of his agents -- asked you to fire Special Counsel Mueller? (b) (5) James Comey 1. In his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee last week, James Comey said he spoke to you and Attorney General Sessions about his “serious concern about the way the president is interacting, especially with the FBI.” Can you describe this conversation? (b) (5) Justice Department Policy Re: Conversations with the President Attorney General Sessions has said that it is Department of Justice policy to not disclose to Congress private conversations with the President. 1. Can you provide this Committee a copy of this policy (b) (5) 2. When was this policy adopted (b) (5) 3. Who crafted this policy (b) (5) 4. What were the factors considered when this policy was adopted by the Department of Justice (b) (5) Your Statement on June 15th On Thursday, June 15, 2017 you released a statement urging Americans to exercise caution regarding news stories and anonymous officials. This statement was released hours after a Washington Post article alleged that President Trump is now a target of Mueller’s investigation. 1. Why did you release this statement (b) (5) 17 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 2. Did you release this statement in reaction to and to counter the claims within the Washington Post article (b) (5) 3. Did anyone from the Trump Administration ask you to make this public statement? (b) (5) 4. Did you consult with anyone, including, Attorney General Sessions, before you released the statement (b) (5) 5. Why did you include the phrase “they do not identify the country” within the statement? (b) (5) 6. Do you have evidence that foreign actors are in fact, acting as anonymous sources? (b) (5) 18 Document ID: 0.7.14615.7687-000002 Lasseter, Dav id F. (OLA) From: Lasseter, David F. {OLA) Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 2:22 PM To: Gannon, Curtis E. (O LC) Cc: Forrester, Nate (OLC) S ubject: RE: DUE 12 PM TUESDAY - DAG QFRs - O LC Draft Responses Many thanks Curtis. We really appreciat e the qui ck turn and the thoughtfulness on these. David From : Gannon, Curtis E. (Ole} Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 2:13 PM To: Lasseter, David F. (OLA} Cc: Forrester, Nate (Ole} > Subject: RE: DUE 12 PM TUESDAY - DAG QFRs - OLC Draft Responses Sorry. I had held off on telling Nate Forrester to transmit our batch while we were still discussing. He appears to have stepped away from his desk now. Here are all of OLC's answers- including Ken's edit- which Nate may or may not have already send to Rana. FROM THE HOUSE DOCUMENT: 1. (MAX Kiliner 1) Earlier this month, Senators Grassley and Feinstein sent the President a letter expressing concern over the Administration, s policy to not respond to members of Congress in the minority party. Senator Grassley noted in this letter that '"'[u]nless Congress explicitly tells the Executive Branch to withhold information based on committee membership or leadership position, there is no legal or Constitutional basis for the Executive Branch to do so_ For OLC to so fundamentally misunderstand and misstate such a simple fact exposes its shocking lack of professionalism and objectivity.= The letter also explicitly states that the Administration's policy "harms not just the Members who happen to be in the minority party at the moment, but also, Members in the majority party who are not currently Chairmen." On May 11th, Ranking ).1embers Serrano and Lowey wrote a letter to Attorney General Sessions, you were copied as well, with several questions regarding the firing of FBI director Corney and his request for additional resources. No response has even been received.. a Did the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General have any role in crafting the OL C ' s policy not to respond to ov ersight requests from the members in the minority? If yes, w hat role did the Attorney General and/or Deputy Attorney General play in crafting this policy? OLC Draft Res~onse: Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895 (b ) (5 ) (b) (5) 2. (MAX Cartwright 2) In a recent opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel concluded that individual ::Vlembers of Congress do not have the right to conduct oversight of the executive branch. According to this opinion, when an individual member of Congress, someone who is not a chair of a committee or subcommittee, requests information from the Justice Department, for example, the department has no constitutional obligation to respond_ Since the beginning of this year my colleagues in the minority have sent many letters and requests to the administration that have gone unanswered. including 7 letters to the Department of Justice alone. Does your Department intend to respond to their questions? What message does it send about the accountability of this administration and its interest in being open, transparent, and looking to work with Congress if yon are dedaring you are free from the responsibility of even answering letters from duly elected members of Congress? OLC Draft Response· (b) (5) FROM THE SENATE DOCUMENT: Question 2: Responding to Congressional {l\-linority) Requests On May 1, 2017, the Jnstice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issned a letter opinion for the cowise1 to the president titled "Authority of Individual :::v!embers of Congress to Conduct Oversight of the Executive Branch. In that letter opinion, the OLC took the position that "'individual members of Congress, including ranking minority members, do not have the authority to conduct oversight in the absence of a specific delegation by a full house, committee, or subcommittee." TI According to the Office of Legal Counsel the executive branch is not obligated to answer my requests or those of my Democratic colleagues. This is unacceptable. As elected officials of a co-equal branch of government, we have constitutional authority to conduct oversight of the executive branch. 1. (MAX Feinstein) Is it your view that the Administration has no legal obligation to respond to requests that do not come from a committee chairman? Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895 (b) (5) Le ahy i\b v 1. 2 01 7. OLC :Memo On May 1, the Justice Department's Office of legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion asserting that the Department is under no legal obligation to respond to oversight requests. from minority members. of Congress. The opinion indicates that responding to requests from individual members of Congress, including Ranking Minority members., is discretionary. This is a flawed opinion and falls grossly short of the Departments responsibilities to Congress. Senator Grassley aptly descnbed the memo as "nonsense." L Will you rescind the May 1, 2017, OLC memo? - '1111 Le ahy Voting Rights The President' s. May 11, 2017, Executive Order created a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Rather than protecting the right to vote in this cowitr)• this commission seems directed at finding cases. of voter :fraud and impersonation which are very rare and much less. c.ommon than voter disenfranchisement through strict voter ID laws. 1. What role did you and other Justice Department employees play in writing the May 11 Executive Order? _ ,. .,. OLC Draft Response. r ntemaJ notes: Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895 (b) (5) (b) (5) (b) (5) 2_ Were career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division consulted? If not, why? 1111 OLC Draft Response : (b) (5) (b) (5) 3_ The Executive Order s.ays the commission "shall have staff to provide support for its functions_" Has the Justice Department provided any staff to work full- or part-time for the commission? OLC Draft Response 4. (b) (5) Do you think the rare incidences of voter fraud and impersonation merit the creation of this commission? OLC Draft Response (b) (5) Van Hollen Special Counsel 2 _ Do you believe that the Constitution implicitly grants sitting presidents immunity from criminal prosecution? - Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895 (b) ( 5 ) Van Hollen Justice Department Policv Re: Conversations with the President Attorney General Ses.sions has said that it is. Department of Justice policy to not disclose to Congres.s. private convers.ations with the Pres.ident. 1. Can you provide this. Committee a copy of this policy? 2. When was this policy adopted? 3. Who crafted this. policy? _ - -- _ ·- -·- ·- _ 4. What were the factors considered when this policy was adopted by the Department of Justice? OLC Draft Response Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895 (b ) (5) From: Lasseter, David F. (OLA) Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 2:07 PM (b)(6) To: Gannon, Curtis E. (OLC) • Subject: RE: DUE 12 PM TUESDAY - DAG QFRs -- Individual-Member Letters and Conversations with President Curtis- good afternoon. Do you mind checking on the status of the QFR responses assigned to OLC. We had a noon deadline today and I do not believe we have all of them. Many thanks, David David F. Lasseter Deputy Assistant Attorney General Office of Legislative Affairs U.S. Department of Justice IIIIIIIDDmlll Document ID: 0.7.14615.11895