The Justice Division on Tuesday launched a report that accused the Biden administration of utilizing the FACE Act to focus on anti-abortion activists who had been prosecuted for blocking sufferers’ entry to reproductive well being clinics.
The report is the primary of a number of anticipated to be issued by the Weaponization Working Group, created final 12 months, that’s meant to look at quite a lot of matters from the Jan. 6 prosecutions, to the dealing with of investigations into President Trump throughout his trip of workplace.
Congress handed the FACE Act in 1994 to handle rising considerations about threats and intimidation that girls had been dealing with at reproductive well being clinics. Nonviolent and first-time offenses of the regulation are misdemeanors, whereas repeat offenses or violations that lead to bodily harm or dying may be handled as felonies.
The practically 900-page report, which incorporates inside Justice Division information, claims that the Justice Division underneath former Lawyer Basic Merrick Garland “violated the rights of People” by solely making use of the regulation to help these in help of abortion rights, not those that labored at anti-abortion rights amenities.
Forward of its launch, the Justice Division on Monday fired 4 federal prosecutors concerned in Biden-era FACE Act instances, in what many present and former profession division officers considered as an act of political retribution for engaged on felony issues opposed by the Trump administration, CBS Information beforehand reported.
The report accuses the Justice Division and FBI underneath former President Joe Biden of collaborating with pro-abortion rights teams to get real-time data on anti-abortion rights teams’ protest exercise, accuses “Biden DOJ prosecutors” of knowingly withholding proof and screening out jurors primarily based on faith, and claims workers assisted pro-abortion rights teams with getting grant cash from the division.
It additionally means that Garland’s Nationwide Activity Pressure on Violence Towards Reproductive Well being Care Suppliers was overly chummy with abortion rights teams just like the Deliberate Parenthood Federation of America, and accused the top of the duty drive, Sanjay Patel, of monitoring the actions of “pro-life activists for years earlier than charging them.”
Report launch preceded by firings
Patel was among the many 4 prosecutors fired on Tuesday, a authorities official confirmed, in what marks the newest purge of Justice Division workers who had been concerned in felony or civil instances opposed by the Trump administration or Mr. Trump’s allies.
Patel was beforehand positioned on administrative go away in March, as a draft of the FACE Act report was being circulated internally.
He declined to touch upon his removing from the division.
Sunita Doddamani, a federal prosecutor in Michigan’s Jap District, was one other one of many 4 folks fired in connection along with her work on a FACE Act case.
In a press release to CBS, she mentioned, “I’m pleased with my service on the Division of Justice and of the work our groups carried out in accordance with the regulation and our skilled obligations in issues assigned to me.”
She added that it was an honor to serve and to “uphold the rule of regulation.”
The report additionally alleges that prosecutors usually sought harsher sentences for anti-abortion activists, noting they requested “a mean sentence of 26.8 months for pro-life defendants, in comparison with 12.3 months for pro-choice defendants.”
In a press release, Performing Lawyer Basic Todd Blanche mentioned: “No Division ought to conduct selective prosecution primarily based on beliefs. The weaponization that occurred underneath the Biden Administration is not going to occur once more, as we restore integrity to our prosecutorial system.”
Though the division fired a number of prosecutors forward of the report’s launch, the report mentioned it doesn’t include any findings regarding inside misconduct investigations into any workers concerned within the “weaponization of the FACE Act.”
“The place applicable, DOJ could refer present or former workers for felony prosecution,” the report says. “Likewise, DOJ could refer present or former workers to the related bar affiliation or highest judicial authority of the jurisdictions wherein they’re licensed to handle compliance with relevant Guidelines of Skilled Conduct. Right here, applicable inside referrals have been made.”
Stacey Younger, a former Civil Rights Division legal professional who based and leads the nonprofit Justice Connection, denounced the firings in a press release on Monday.
“Congress handed the FACE Act with bipartisan help greater than 30 years in the past, and courts have constantly upheld the constitutionality of its provisions that guarantee secure entry to reproductive well being companies,” she mentioned. “Firing DOJ attorneys for zealously implementing the regulation is unconscionable — it politicizes the division’s enforcement actions and punishes devoted civil servants for doing their jobs.”
Lengthy-standing complaints
The Trump administration has lengthy alleged, with scant proof, that the Biden-era Civil Rights Division used the FACE Act to deliberately goal conservative Christians who’re morally against abortion.
Though the Justice Division did additionally pursue felony expenses in opposition to abortion rights activists who had been accused of attempting to scare volunteers and employees at a disaster being pregnant clinic that endorsed on options to abortion, the report says the whole variety of such instances was minimal in comparison with these concentrating on conservative anti-abortion Christians.
Mr. Trump early into his second time period pardoned lots of the FACE Act defendants convicted in the course of the Biden administration. The Justice Division additionally dismissed a number of different FACE Act instances and ordered prosecutors to place the brakes on future FACE Act investigations.
On the similar time, nevertheless, the present Justice Division has allowed the remaining FACE Act instances involving abortion rights activists to proceed with out interference, with one Florida-based defendant receiving a 120-day jail time period in March 2025.
On former Lawyer Basic Pam Bondi’s first day on the job, she ordered the Justice Division to determine a “weaponization working group” that may be tasked with, amongst different issues, reviewing the prior use of the FACE Act.
Tuesday’s report marks the primary time the Justice Division has made public any work product from that group.
Former Civil Rights Division attorneys on Tuesday accused the Justice Division of cherry-picking from numerous emails and different inside information in an effort to attain sure conclusions, they usually mentioned the report seems to rejoice the perpetrators of the crimes, whereas ignoring feminine victims.
“This administration would have folks imagine that profession civil servants prosecuted folks merely for partaking in spiritual prayer and expressing anti-abortion beliefs. The enforcement document proves in any other case,” mentioned Regan Rush, Director of Purple Line for Civil Rights at Democracy Ahead and a former Civil Rights Division legal professional. “This baseless report minimizes severe — and sometimes violent — felony conduct, and finally locations ladies looking for entry to medical care, suppliers, and communities at better threat.”
Laura-Kate Bernstein, a former federal prosecutor within the Civil Rights Division felony part who dealt with FACE Act instances, highlighted the story of a sufferer in a single case who tragically miscarried after attempting to get pregnant for years. When she tried to go to a clinic to have her miscarriage medically managed, protestors blocked her path “whereas she sobbed and bled at the back of her automotive,” Bernstein mentioned. That account, she mentioned, was not mentioned within the report.
“This report can’t be squared with the info on the bottom,” she informed CBS Information, including that DOJ is ignoring feminine victims of crime.
“The felony prosecutions concerned defendants that bodily blockaded reproductive well being clinics,” she mentioned, noting that individuals who merely stood by peacefully with indicators weren’t charged in these instances. “The individuals who confronted penalties had been those that violated the regulation through the use of their our bodies, locks, chains and different instruments to bodily blockage clinics.”
Houck case and Patel’s ouster
When Patel was positioned on go away final month, he was knowledgeable that the personnel motion was instantly tied to his prosecution of Mark Houck, an abortion rights opponent and disaster being pregnant middle volunteer in Philadelphia who was acquitted at trial in early 2023 on two FACE Act expenses, based on sources conversant in the matter.
Houck later sued the federal government, claiming amongst different issues that he was the goal of a malicious prosecution. A federal district courtroom decide dismissed the case with prejudice in March 2025, discovering that Houck had “did not rebut the presumption of possible trigger” and subsequently his malicious prosecution, retaliatory prosecution, and false arrest claims had been “not believable.”
Houck later appealed that ruling to the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Third Circuit, however the case was voluntarily dismissed in February 2026, after the Justice Division agreed to pay him $1.1 million to settle it, based on Houck’s lawyer Edward Greim.
The settlement was reached after senior division management sought entry to proof within the case, the sources informed CBS Information. However in reviewing it, the senior Justice Division management didn’t interview the prosecutors concerned, the sources added.
The Houck case is cited closely in Tuesday’s report, which claims the division settled the civil case because of the “Biden DOJ’s misconduct,” with out acknowledging {that a} federal decide had dismissed Houck’s misconduct claims. The report doesn’t clarify what the premise was for claiming there had been misconduct..
The report additionally focuses closely on Patel’s communications with abortion-rights teams, at the same time as present division management can also be routinely speaking with outdoors curiosity teams.
For instance, Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant legal professional basic for civil rights, and her workers have been in current discussions with a serious anti-abortion group about authorized hooks for pursuing actions in opposition to Deliberate Parenthood, based on a number of sources conversant in the matter.
A Justice Division spokesperson mentioned in a press release to CBS Information: “Not like the Biden DOJ, this Division of Justice protects the rights of ALL People, born and unborn. The Civil Rights Division units litigation priorities per the priorities of the Administration.”
Julius Nam, a former federal prosecutor, mentioned that it’s customary for the Justice Division to speak to particular curiosity and authorized advocacy teams and settle for referrals, however that nothing offered within the report on Tuesday advised that the Biden administration DOJ did something unsuitable in the way it engaged with these teams.
“There’s nothing that reveals…they unthinkingly relied on the knowledge and that prosecutors took the knowledge and ran with it,” he mentioned.
However Nam mentioned that the kinds of discussions that the Civil Rights Division is at the moment having with anti-abortion activists who hope to disempower teams with opposing views aren’t regular, and such communications characterize the “weaponization of DOJ for personal curiosity.”
Use of the FACE Act in different Justice Division instances
Even because the Justice Division has pulled again on implementing the FACE Act in opposition to anti-abortion activists, it has additionally sought to make use of the regulation in new and untested methods.
Earlier this 12 months, the Justice Division charged journalist Don Lemon and dozens of others with violating a provision of the regulation in reference to an anti-ICE protest inside a church in Twin Cities, Minnesota, which prohibits folks from intimidating or interfering with folks exercising their constitutional freedom to observe faith.
That provision has by no means been charged earlier than — till now within the Lemon case — as a consequence of historic constitutional considerations by Civil Rights Division attorneys.
The principle drawback, attorneys beforehand informed CBS Information, is that the FACE Act essentially misstates the rights folks have underneath the First Modification. Whereas the First Modification protects folks’s spiritual freedom from authorities interference, it doesn’t defend folks’s spiritual freedom from interference by non-public people, just like the protesters and journalists charged within the indictment.
The regulation has solely been used to prosecute individuals who hinder reproductive well being clinics as a result of they’re thought-about interstate commerce companies. Church buildings, against this, are typically not in that class.
Earlier draft excerpts of the FACE Act report beforehand reviewed by CBS Information present that the Justice Division’s civil rights appellate attorneys penned a memo in 2018 which warned prosecutors to not cost the home of worship provision as a result of it was unconstitutional and lacks a jurisdictional hook.
Such an inside memo might doubtlessly hurt the continued FACE Act prosecution in Minnesota. The ultimate model of the report launched on Tuesday doesn’t seem to make reference to the memo.
