Skip to content

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Because no one
is above the law!

Donate

Tom Fitton's Judicial Watch Weekly Update

What is Pelosi Hiding on Capitol Riot?

Biden’s Dangerous Attack on Immigration Law
Judicial Watch Sues Capitol Police for Riot Emails and Video
LAWSUIT: Coach Fired for Objecting to BLM/Critical Race Theory in Daughter’s Class

Biden’s Dangerous Attack on Immigration Law

You knew a border free for all was coming. Just yesterday, the Biden administration put forward mass amnesty legislation. But President Biden isn’t waiting on Congress, he already is dictatorially pushing for effective amnesty by attempting to largely shut down enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws. Here are the facts and their significance in a Judicial Watch op-ed we wrote for The Hill.

America is facing a worsening crisis of uncontrolled illegal immigration. The Biden administration’s approach weakens the border and nationalizes some of the most radical “sanctuary” practices. This is dangerous and it undermines the rule of law.

Biden adopted the extremist tack during his first week in office, issuing an executive order authorizing “catch and release” programs at the border, and freezing deportations. It also emerged that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is saying that apprehended aliens are not being tested for COVID-19, potentially introducing new disease vectors into the American population at large. As such, releasing them into the country places the public health at risk, not only from COVID-19 but also, as Judicial Watch has reported, from tuberculosis, pneumonia and other health risks.

The number of attempted border crossings has predictably been increasing since the election. CBP Deputy Chief Raul Ortiz said that, in the first ten days of February, CBP “has averaged more than 3,000 daily apprehensions” with a further daily “more than 1,000 border-crossing ‘got-aways,’ migrants whom agents were able to detect but not detain.”

The Biden administration announced its 100-day freeze on deportations while it evaluates further changes to Trump administration immigration policies. A Jan. 20 memo from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Acting Secretary David Pekoske, “Review of and Interim Revision to Civil Immigration Enforcement and Removal Policies and Procedures,” laid out the details on the deportation freeze and new enforcement priorities. The only “non-citizens” subject to removal (or even questioning) under the terms of the memo are those deemed to be national security threats, post-Nov. 1 border crossers, and those “currently incarcerated for an aggravated felony conviction and who are determined to be a threat to public safety.” This means that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will not deport those with other criminal records, including sex offenses, domestic violence, drug violations, property crimes and any misdemeanors.

But Texas has put the brakes on the new policy, at least temporarily. State Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration over the freeze, claiming that halting deportations was unconstitutional. Last Monday, Judge Drew Tipton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas extended a nationwide temporary restraining order against the deportation freeze, ruling that allowing the Biden administration to go ahead with its plans could potentially cause, as the state argues, “irreparable harms,” such as impacts to Texas’s law enforcement, housing, education, employment, commerce and health care needs and budgets.

Paxton took to Twitter to declare an all-caps “VICTORY” against “a seditious left-wing insurrection.” But the Biden team apparently is defying the court — for example, halting ICE deportation flights to Haiti and countries in Africa in response to frantic lobbying by immigration activists and members of Congress. If President Trump had similarly obstructed a court order, Democrats undoubtedly would have rushed to file more articles of impeachment.

The dangers of Biden’s policy approach are obvious. We already have the grim experience of releasing criminal illegals in sanctuary cities. Last year, 92-year-old Queens resident Maria Fuertes was raped and murdered, allegedly by Reeaz Khan, a 21-year-old illegal from Guyana. Months earlier, Khan was arrested in New York City for assault, and ICE authorities requested that he be turned over for possible deportation. Instead, Khan was released under New York sanctuary policies.

We cannot count on the Biden administration to give us the full story about the potentially negative impacts of its misguided policies. White House press secretary Jen Psaki seemed befuddled when asked about the lack of COVID-19 testing for those caught and released under Biden’s new executive order. But recall that, in 2014, it was revealed that the Obama-Biden administration had lied when it claimed that the 2,200 detained illegals it released into the country for budget reasons only had minor criminal records. In fact, internal documents were uncovered that showed some of those who were released were facing charges including “kidnapping, sexual assault, drug trafficking and homicide.” Under the new Biden policy, at least we know that such felons are already being given the green light to stay in the country.

These changes to immigration policies serve as critical examples of the ideologically driven, extreme policy priorities of our supposedly moderate president. Biden is effectively seeking open-borders amnesty by hook or by crook, with zero regard for public health and safety – or rule of law.


Judicial Watch Sues Capitol Police for Riot Emails and Video

As we might expect of an agency overseen by four Congressional committees, the U.S. Capitol Police is not a model of transparency or accountability.

We don’t trust Nancy Pelosi (or, frankly, any other politician) to honestly examine the many controversies surrounding January 6, and so we want a closer look.

Judicial Watch, stepping up for the American people, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Capitol Police seeking emails and videos concerning the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)).

We sued under the common law right of access to public records after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to our January 21, 2021, request for:

  • Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.
  • Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.
  • All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021

Conveniently, Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act, and the Capitol Police declined to give us any records about the riot, writing in a February 11, 2021, letter that the requested emails and videos are not “public records.”

However, the public has a right to know about how Congress handled security and what all the videos show of the U.S. Capitol riot. What are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer trying to hide from the American people?

LAWSUIT: Coach Fired for Objecting to BLM/Critical Race Theory in Daughter’s Class

Too many children are being subjected to racial indoctrination in their schools. And one parent who objected seems to have been fired for objecting to their then-school’s attempted indoctrination of his daughter in Black Lives Matter/critical race theory.

David Flynn, the father of two Dedham, Massachusetts, Public School students, was removed from his position as head football coach after exercising his right as a citizen to raise concerns about his daughter’s seventh-grade history class curriculum being changed to include biased coursework on politics, race, gender equality, and diversity (Flynn v. Forrest et al. (No. 21-cv-10256)).

We filed suit on his behalf in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, seeking damages against the superintendent, high school principal, and high school athletic director for retaliating against Flynn for exercising his First Amendment rights. Attorney Andrew J. Couture of Leominster, Massachusetts, is assisting.

The lawsuit details that in September 2020, Flynn’s daughter’s seventh-grade history class, which was listed as “World Geography and Ancient History I,” was taught issues of race, gender, stereotypes, prejudices, discrimination, and politics. The lawsuit explains:

In one assignment, Plaintiff’s daughter was asked to consider various “risk factors” and “mitigating factors” that two people – one identified as “white” and the other identified as “black” – purportedly might use to assess each other on a city street. Included among the various factors were skin color, gender, age, physical appearance, and attire. “Black,” “aggressive body language” and “wrong neighborhood” were among the “risk factors” purportedly assessed by the person identified as “white.” “White” and “Police officer” were among the “risk factors” purportedly assessed by the person identified as “black.”

Concerned about the abrupt change in curriculum, Flynn and his wife contacted the history teacher and principal of the school – then later Superintendent Michael J. Welch and three members of the Dedham School Committee. On more than one occasion the Flynns asked for assistance in resolving the issues with the curriculum. Ultimately, in October 2020, the Flynns removed their children from school. The Flynns’ list of concerns included:

  • Dedham Public Schools changed the curriculum of the seventh-grade history class without notifying parents or having a course description and syllabus available for parents to review
  • The new seventh-grade history class curriculum containing coursework on politics, race, gender equality, and diversity that were not suitable for twelve- and thirteen-year-olds;
  • The seventh-grade history teacher not teaching topicsof politics, race, gender equality, and diversity objectively;
  • The seventh-grade history teacher using a cartoon character of herself wearing a t-shirt supporting a controversial political movement; and
  • The seventh-grade history teacher using class materialsthat labeled all police officers as risks to all black people and all black males as risks to white people.

In January 2021, Flynn, who had been the head football coach at Dedham High School (DHS) since 2011, was called into a meeting with Welch as well as the DHS principal and athletic director. At the meeting, Welch handed Flynn one of the emails he had written to the Dedham School Committee members and informed him that one of the committee members asked Welch, “What are we going to do about this?” At the end of the meeting Flynn was told that they, “were going in a different direction” with the football program. Minutes later, the superintendent, high school principal, and athletic director released a public statement, stating that Flynn was removed as head football coach because he “expressed significant philosophical differences with the direction, goals, and values of the school district.”

Flynn’s written objections to the BLM/critical race theory included the following point:

The Superintendent has had the opportunity to make sure the Dedham teachers conduct themselves as professionals and to teach the courses objectively and without biased opinions. He chose not to. I believe that the real men and women in the world are the ones who have the ability to compromise, especially in extremely controversial situations. Compromise allows people to experience life as a team. This is where unity brings individual pride together and relationships begin to strengthen. I believe all relationships are based on compromise.  The Superintendent was not willing to compromise.  I explained to him that if the teacher teaches the course objectively and removes the BLM logo from the class, people will soon get over the fact that the class was purposely created without notifying parents and without having a visible course curriculum, syllabus and learning objective. Apparently, it does not mean much to him that the Dedham Public School System is losing two wonderful students.

We are asking the court to award damages to the Flynns and that a jury trial be held. WCVB ABC 5 reported that since his firing, several rallies have been held by current and former students, parents, and community members in support of Flynn. At a January 21, 2021, rally, a former Dedham High School football player said, “Everyone loves coach, he gets kids to play football. Coach Flynn is an awesome guy and we’re all devastated that they fired him.”

Cancel culture has come to high school football. Coach Flynn was fired for exercising his constitutional right to object – as a citizen and father – to an extremist and racially inflammatory school curriculum in his child’s history class. We can’t let that stand.

Until next week …


Related

FOIA Under Attack by Biden DOJ!

Records Detail Federal-State Censorship Coordination in 2020 Election Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order the Release of the Audio of President Biden’s Interview with Special Counse...

Judicial Watch Sues for ATF Records on Arkansas Raid that Led to Shooting Death…

Press Releases | June 21, 2024
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firear...

Judicial Watch Asks Federal Court to Order Release of the Audio of President Biden’s…

Press Releases | June 21, 2024
Biden Justice Department Argument is ‘Repugnant’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced it requested a federal court to reject the Biden Justice Department’s request to rewrit...