[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 182 (Monday, October 18, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7021-S7022]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Department of Justice
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, earlier this month, Attorney General
Garland released a memo instructing Department of Justice employees to
respond to increasingly passionate school board meetings across the
country. That memo talks about working to stop the violence and the
threats of violence. That part of it is very fine, but unfortunately
the memo makes it sound like the Department of Justice might want to go
after much more than just violence.
Over the last year, school board meetings have turned from relatively
calm, local affairs to often boisterous meetings that are seen across
the country. This began with parents who were upset after schools were
being closed last year well after we learned that they could safely
reopen in spite of COVID-19. Then these meetings grew to include
pushback against mask mandates for students and against school
districts adopting a curriculum known as critical race theory.
There are many parents across the country who are upset about these
things, and that is their right, to be upset about them and to talk
about them all they want to--after all, freedom of speech, freedom of
assembly.
So here is the issue. The Attorney General's memo spoke of violence
and threats of violence. Make no mistake about it--violence should
never be used to get what you want in politics. It is illegal for a
good reason, and making real, true threats is illegal as well. They
scare people, and that is not right. No one should ever threaten
someone with violence just because they are angry about some school
policy.
Unfortunately, however, the Department of Justice memo goes further
than that. A person reading it might think that a parent can't speak--
really speak his or her mind at a school board meeting; that spirited
debate is not welcome; that very pointed and direct questions from
educators to school board members aren't welcome; that deep
disagreements are not welcome. Parents coming and speaking to their
local school boards is what our democracy is all about--the essence of
our representative system of government. Whether it is Congress, State
legislatures, city hall, or school boards, we ought to be able to have
civil discussion, and nobody ought to question that civil discussion.
Of course, democracy also includes very passionate disagreements. If
an elected official can't handle a passionate disagreement, then he or
she shouldn't go into politics in the first place. That goes for the
President; that goes for this Senator; and that goes for every member
on every school board in the country.
Elected officials don't go crying to the FBI when constituents tell
them something--how they are really feeling on an issue--regardless of
how strong that feeling might be.
If a parent is passionately advocating for her child at a school
board meeting and school officials tell her she is out of line, the
parent should not have to worry that the FBI is going to pay her a
visit in her home after that meeting.
She should not have to wonder whether the PATRIOT Act is going to be
used to investigate her. It should never even cross that person's mind.
If
[[Page S7022]]
it does, then she might just stop talking altogether at a meeting, and
there would be a chilling effect on democracy.
That chilling effect is a very bad thing for democracies. In other
words, it should never happen in the first place. So it is critically
important for the Attorney General to make very clear to everybody
that, short of violence and making true threats of violence, the
Federal Government will have nothing to do with the crowds and the
comments that people make at a school board meeting.
All of my Republican colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee and
I sent a letter to the Attorney General telling him just that. He
should make clear to all Americans that, unless there is physical
violence or a threat of physical violence, Federal law enforcement has
nothing to do with local school board meetings; and he ought to take
into consideration the capability of local law enforcement to take care
of it in the first place.