Common-Sense Law Enforcement and Accountability Now in DC Act of 2025

— 576 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 38. Garland Memorandum, October 4, 2021; press release, “America First Legal Seeks Two Federal Investigations on Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Infamous Oct. 4th Memo Siccing the FBI on Concerned Parents,” America First Legal Foundation, March 14, 2022, https://aflegal.org/america-first-legal-seeks-two-federal- investigations-on-attorney-general-merrick-garlands-infamous-oct-4th-memo-siccing-the-fbi-on-concerned- parents/ (accessed February 3, 2023). 39. Luke Rosiak, “In Aftermath of Enemies List, School Committee Pledges to ‘Silence the Opposition,’” Daily Wire, March 27, 2021, https://www.dailywire.com/news/after-enemies-list-school-body-pledges-to-silence-the- opposition (accessed February 3, 2023). 40. The language of the Equal Protection Clause “reflects that ‘achieving equal protection against lawbreakers was at the core of the Clause’s objectives.’” Lefebure v. D’Aquilla, 15 F.4th 650, 669 (5th Cir. 2021) (Graves, J. dissenting) (quoting Lawrence Rosenthal, “Policing and Equal Protection,” Yale Law & Policy Review, Vol. 21, No. 53 (2003), p. 70) cert. denied, 212 L. Ed. 2d 791, 142 S. Ct. 2732 (2022)), https://casetext.com/case/ lefebure-v-daquilla-2 (accessed February 3, 2023). 41. See, for example, Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler’s actions in 2020 calling on federal officials—executing their mission to protect federal property and officials—to leave the city, saying, “They’re not wanted here” despite the fact that local reports found that “[o]ut of more than a thousand arrests reported by the Portland Police Bureau and other local law enforcement since late May 2020, only about 8.4% of the cases are still open” and that the “rest have been dismissed or listed as no complaint, which means authorities are not currently pursuing charges.” BBC News, “Portland Protests: Mayor Demands Federal Officers Leave City,” July 20, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53466718 (accessed February 3, 2023), and Hannah Lambert, “91% of Portland Protest Arrests Not Being Prosecuted,” Portland Tribune, January 5, 2021, https://archive.ph/ OSDbz (accessed February 3,2023). 42. Figure 4, “Trend in Average Guideline Minimum and Average Sentence Imposed for Armed Career Criminals Fiscal Years 2010–2019,” in U.S. Sentencing Commission, Federal Armed Career Criminals: Prevalence, Patterns, and Pathways, March 2021, p. 26, https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/ research-publications/2021/20210303_ACCA-Report.pdf (accessed February 3, 2023). 43. 18 U.S. Code § 924(e), https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924 (accessed February 3, 2023). 44. S. 1586, Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act, 117th Congress, introduced May 12, 2021, https://www. congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1586 (accessed February 6, 2023). 45. This could require seeking the Supreme Court to overrule Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008), in applicable cases, but the department should place a priority on doing so. 46. 21 U.S. Code § 801 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/chapter-13/subchapter-I/part-A (accessed February 3, 2023). 47. 18 U.S. Code §§ 1961–1968, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96 (accessed February 3, 2023). 48. For more on this topic generally, see “Ensuring Enforcement and Administration of Our Immigration Laws,” infra. 49. See Paul J. Larkin, “Twenty-First Century Illicit Drugs and Their Discontents: The Scourge of Illicit Fentanyl,” Heritage Foundation Legal Memorandum No. 313, November 1, 2022), https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2022-11/LM313.pdf. 50. Jessica Rendall, “100,000 People Died from Drug Overdoses in the US in One Year, a Record,” CNET, November 18, 2021, https://www.cnet.com/health/medical/100000-people-died-from-drug-overdoses-in- the-us-in-one-year-a-record/ (accessed February 3, 2023). 51. U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division, “Information About the Department of Justice’s China Initiative and a Compilation of China-Related Prosecutions Since 2018,” last updated November 19, 2021, https://www.justice.gov/archives/nsd/information-about-department-justice-s-china-initiative-and- compilation-china-related (accessed February 3, 2023). 52. Ronn Blitzer and Jake Gibson, “Biden DOJ Ending National Security Initiative Aimed at Countering China amid Complaints About Bias,” Fox News, February 23, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-ending-china- initiative-national-security-program-bias (accessed February 3, 2023). 53. National Security Strategy, The White House, October 2022, p. 23, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf (accessed February 3, 2023). See also ibid., p. 8. — 577 — Department of Justice 54. U.S. Department of Justice, “About DOJ: Our Mission,” https://www.justice.gov/about (accessed February 4, 2023). 55. 18 U.S. Code § 248, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/248 (accessed February 4, 2023). 56. Danielle Wallace and Jake Gibson, “Pro-life Activist Mark Houck Pleads Not Guilty to Federal Charges After FBI Arrest,” Fox News, September 27, 2022, https://www.foxnews.com/us/pro-life-activist-mark-houck-pleads- not-guilty-federal-charges-fbi-arrest (accessed February 4, 2023). 57. Patty Knap, “Paul Vaughn, Pro-life Father of 11 Arrested by FBI Speaks Out,” National Catholic Register, October 18, 2022, https://www.ncregister.com/news/paul-vaughn-pro-life-father-of-11-arrested-by-fbi-speaks- out (accessed February 4, 2023). 58. 597 U.S. ___ (2022), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/19-1392/case.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 59. Jonah McKeown, “TRACKER: Pro-Abortion Attacks in the U.S. Continue (Updated),” Catholic News Agency, last updated September 22, 2022, https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251553/map-vandalism- attacks-continue-at-pro-life-centers-across-us (accessed February 4, 2023). 60. 28 U.S. Code § 516, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/516 (accessed February 4, 2023). 61. 28 U.S. Code § 519, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/519 (accessed February 4, 2023). 62. 295 U.S. 602 (1935), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/295/602/ (accessed February 6, 2023). 63. 591 U.S. ___ (2020), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-7_new_0pm1.pdf (accessed February 6, 2023). 64. See Brief for the United States, 303 Creative v. Aubrey Elenis, No. 21-476, August 2022, https://www. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-476/234119/20220819182151542_21-476%20303%20Creative%20LLC%20 v.%20Elenis%20FINAL.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 65. Oral Argument Transcript, 303 Creative v. Aubrey Elenis, No. 21-476, December 5, 2022, https:// www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2022/21-476_8n59.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 66. Brief for the United States, Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, No. 16-111, September 2017, p. 9, https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/16-111-tsac-USA.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023) (quoting Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2321, 2327 (2013), quoting in turn Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47, 61 (2006)). 67. Ibid., p. 10. 68. Ibid., pp. 10–11. 69. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943), https://tile.loc.gov/storage- services/service/ll/usrep/usrep319/usrep319624/usrep319624.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 70. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 24 (1971), https://constitutionallawreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ Cohen-v_-California.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023). 71. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 640. 72. McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464, 476 (2014), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/12-1168/ case.pdf (accessed February 4, 2023) (quoting FCC v. League of Women Voters of California, 468 U. S. 364, 377 (1984)). 73. See, for example, 42 U.S. Code § 2000d, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000d (accessed February 4, 2023); 42 U.S. Code § 2000e, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000e (accessed February 4, 2023); 20 U.S. Code § 1681, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1681 (accessed February 4, 2023) 74. See “Advancing Equity and Racial Justice Through the Federal Government,” The White House, https://www. whitehouse.gov/equity/ (accessed February 4, 2023). 75. 18 U.S. Code § 1461, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1461 (accessed February 6, 2023). See also 18 U.S. Code § 1462, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1462 (accessed February 6, 2023). 76. 18 U.S. Code § 241, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 (accessed February 6, 2023). 77. A similar argument could be advanced for the department’s other criminal law enforcement responsibilities such as those within the Environmental and Natural Resources Division. 78. See, for example, Paul Kiel, “Controversial USA Delivered ‘Voter Fraud’ Indictments Right on Time,” TPM Muckraker, May 1, 2007, https://web.archive.org/web/20070503021505/http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/ archives/003107.php (accessed February 4, 2023).

— 335 — Department of Education discipline policies, commonly known as “restorative justice.” Academic studies, as well as student and teacher surveys, suggest that academics and school climate have been harmed substantially by this push. The Trump Administration rescinded the Obama Administration’s guidance on school discipline and corrected the Obama Administration’s overreach in Title VI enforcement. l The next Administration should continue the policy of the Trump Administration in this area and direct the department to conduct a comprehensive review of all Title VI cases to ascertain to what extent these cases include allegations of disparate impact. l OCR should also review all resolution agreements with school districts to conform with this policy. l As part of this effort, the new Administration should also direct the department and DOJ jointly to issue enforcement guidance stating that the agencies will no longer investigate Title VI cases that exclusively rest on allegations of disparate impact. l To the extent that the Biden Administration publishes guidance or promulgates a regulation on this topic, the next Administration should rescind the guidance and commence rulemaking to rescind the regulation. Getting the federal government out of the business of dictating school discipline policy is a good start. But if the next conservative Department of Education simply rescinds the Biden-era regulation, it could very easily be enforced again on Day One through a Dear Colleague Letter by another leftist Administration. l In addition to rescinding the policy and any related guidance, the next Secretary should work with the next Attorney General on a regulation that would clarify current regulations to state that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act does not include a disparate impact standard. As law professor Gail Heriot has noted, the alleged existence of a disparate impact standard under Title VI makes everything presumed illegal unless given special dispensation by the federal government. l Although it would require political capital from the White House, given that mainstream news outlets are sure to frame it as an attack

— 335 — Department of Education discipline policies, commonly known as “restorative justice.” Academic studies, as well as student and teacher surveys, suggest that academics and school climate have been harmed substantially by this push. The Trump Administration rescinded the Obama Administration’s guidance on school discipline and corrected the Obama Administration’s overreach in Title VI enforcement. l The next Administration should continue the policy of the Trump Administration in this area and direct the department to conduct a comprehensive review of all Title VI cases to ascertain to what extent these cases include allegations of disparate impact. l OCR should also review all resolution agreements with school districts to conform with this policy. l As part of this effort, the new Administration should also direct the department and DOJ jointly to issue enforcement guidance stating that the agencies will no longer investigate Title VI cases that exclusively rest on allegations of disparate impact. l To the extent that the Biden Administration publishes guidance or promulgates a regulation on this topic, the next Administration should rescind the guidance and commence rulemaking to rescind the regulation. Getting the federal government out of the business of dictating school discipline policy is a good start. But if the next conservative Department of Education simply rescinds the Biden-era regulation, it could very easily be enforced again on Day One through a Dear Colleague Letter by another leftist Administration. l In addition to rescinding the policy and any related guidance, the next Secretary should work with the next Attorney General on a regulation that would clarify current regulations to state that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act does not include a disparate impact standard. As law professor Gail Heriot has noted, the alleged existence of a disparate impact standard under Title VI makes everything presumed illegal unless given special dispensation by the federal government. l Although it would require political capital from the White House, given that mainstream news outlets are sure to frame it as an attack — 336 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise on civil rights, the next conservative Administration should take sweeping action to assure that the purpose of the Civil Rights Act is not inverted through a disparate impact standard to provide a pretext for theoretically endless federal meddling. Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities; Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Equity in IDEA) l Effective January 18, 2017, the department issued final regulations under Part B of IDEA that require states to consider race and ethnicity in the identification, placement, and discipline of students with disabilities. The new Administration should rescind this regulation. Students should never be denied access to special education services because of their race or ethnicity, but this is happening in school districts across the country thanks to the Obama Administration’s Equity in IDEA regulation. This was not the intent of the regulation, but it is an inevitable byproduct of its flawed assumptions. The Obama Administration looked at the racial statistics on special education assignment and made two assumptions: that African American students were dis- proportionately overrepresented, and that this overrepresentation constituted a harm that required federal pressure to ameliorate. School districts deemed to overrepresent minority students in special education assignment, or in discipline amongst special education students, are tagged by their state education agencies as engaging in “significant disproportionality,” and are required to reallocate 15 percent of their IDEA Part B money into coordinated early intervening services that are intended to address the “root causes of dispro- portionality.” In practice, this can mean raiding special education funding to pay for CRT-inspired “equity” consultants and professional development. This is especially problematic given that both of the assumptions behind Equity in IDEA are flawed. Special education services provide extra assistance to students; they do not harm them. And according to the most rigorous research on the subject, conducted by Penn State’s Paul Morgan, black students are actually underrep- resented in special education once adequate statistical controls are made. That means that this regulation effectively further depresses the provision of valuable services to an already underserved group. l The next Administration should immediately commence rulemaking to rescind the Equity in IDEA regulation. No replacement regulation is required. l The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) should prepare a digest of the best research on this subject and share