Multiple Congressmen expressed frustration at the inefficacy of FBI oversight as currently carried out by the House Judiciary Committee in a hearing today. FBI Director Robert Mueller was the sole witness. Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) opened the session complaining in an exasperated tone that the committee had not yet received a response to a September 5 letter asking about “the FBI’s anthrax investigation, disturbing revelations about the Bureau’s improper collection of information on reporters, the FBI’s approach to this country’s mortgage fraud crisis, and the expanded investigative and intelligence gathering powers resulting from the proposed Attorney General Guidelines concerning the FBI’s domestic operations.”

Conyers and other congressmen elaborated in questions about why they wanted the Attorney General Guidelines (set to be made public in a few weeks), which Mueller said were still under review but which would unify the FBI’s standards for starting investigations over different types of investigations. For example, the standards for when to open a criminal investigation are different from those used for national security investigations, and it is hoped that the new guidelines would make standards easier to follow. Congressman Artur Davis (D-Ala.), a former assistant U.S. Attorney, questioned Mueller about whether the new standards for opening an investigation would be lower than the standards police use for when they are allowed to stop and question a person (set out in the Terry v. Ohio Supreme Court decision of 1968). Mueller resisted the comparison, but Davis pointed out that the investigative activities carried out by the FBI are similar to those used by police. Mueller finally admitted that the standard has a lower threshold, so investigations could be opened without having reasonable suspicion based on “specific and articulable facts” that a person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.

Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) expressed frustration at the committee’s policy of allowing each congressman only 5 minutes for asking questions; “this format doesn’t work,” he said, pointing out that it was impossible to get deep into any issue in that time. He suggested the FBI could have experts in particular areas come testify, and on a more frequent basis than Director Mueller does. Mueller responded by saying that the committee will always be frustrated regardless of administration, as answers to questions must be vetted before being sent back. He also offered to come up to the hill at any time for briefings or discussions.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) asked Director Mueller about allegations that voters will be challenged at polling places if their homes have been foreclosed on. Mueller said he had not heard about that particular plan. He said the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division would investigate any such issue, though Mueller was unable to name the head of that division without the help of an aide. Mueller promised to follow up on making sure the Civil Rights Division knew about the problem, and Chairman Conyers assured Waters that Civil Rights Division head Grace Chung Becker would be testifying before the committee soon.

The House Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee met to discuss the State Secrets Protection Act of 2008. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) who introduced the legislation, said members of the Executive Branch are misusing the state secrets privilege to avoid Congressional oversight and thus, shielding itself from questions concerning spying against Americans and acts of torture committed at Guantanamo Bay. He said the act protects justice and, noting checks and balances, the Constitution. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) referenced a Los Angeles Times article from 2006 that suggests over half of government information is over-classified.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) said disclosing classified information threatens the national security of the United States and that though a denial of access to judicial review may be disadvantageous for some, it is necessary for the safety of all Americans. Franks said that the post-September 11 era has shown the significant role of the state secrets privilege in the Department of Justice. He also said the Supreme Court has defended the privilege, adding that he finds it “shocking” that Democrats want courts to deviate from precedent as 200 detainees at Guantanamo Bay qualify for trial in American courts.

Meredith Fuchs of the National Security Archives supported the State Secrets Protection Act, saying that federal agencies often do not feel the need to disclose information without independent pressure. She said courts should have the right to consider evidence in claims of state secrets privilege, adding that courts should not refuse evidence provided by non-governmental experts. Steven Shapiro of the American Civil Liberties Union said Nadler’s legislation restores the state secrets privilege to its proper role and bring legal clarity. Shapiro said the ACLU supports the passing of the State Secrets Protection Act. Michael Vatis, a partner at Steptoe & Johnson, LLP expressed concern with a section of the act he said could be interpreted to mean that courts would analyze governmental and independent evidence equally. He said courts should exercise judgement but give substantial weight to the, potentially better-informed, government.

The House Judiciary Committee oversaw a hearing on electronic employment verification systems and the safeguards needed to protect privacy and prevent misuse within them. Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) presided over the hearing, while Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tex.), and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) served as the primary witnesses. Both Lofgren and Conyers wanted a thorough explanation of the E-Verify system and the New Employee Verification Act (NEVA), sorting out the fact from the fiction. (more…)

At a subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary hearing on whether or not the Federal Justice System is engaging in selective prosecution, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) says that the “Republican National Committee is in big trouble” in several respects, and cites the 2002 phone jamming case involving Allen Raymond and James Tobin. (0:26)

 Other Media: Download

At the House Judiciary Committee FBI Oversight Full Committee hearing on the FBI, Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), says [to FBI Director Robert Mueller] can every member of Congress assume they can be broken into, like Jefferson? Mueller says that Jefferson wasn’t broken into, it was the execution of a search warrant. Conyers says, so that’s a yes? We can get busted too? Mueller there is an intervening circuit court opinion that requires them to follow protocols although he isn’t clear what the protocols are. We’re very sensitive, he says, to the debate clause and the debate opinion. Conyers says, “I’m glad you’re sensitive, we are too.” (1:12)

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The question before us today, is if the Federal Bureau is using its resources wisely and appropriately. At the House Judiciary Committee FBI Oversight Full Committee hearing on the FBI, Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) said there are serious concerns about the FBI wiretapping the voices of Members of Congress during the investigation into Congressman Renzi, and the point, he said, is that surveillance “of this nature” by necessity, raises serious constitutional questions- most notably the speech and debate clause. Can any member of Congress get their office broken into, he asked, and can any member of Congress have their phones tapped? (more…)

Congressman John Conyers interviewed by TRNS bureau chief Ellen Ratner at the Health Action 2008 Families USA DC radio row.

Ellen Ratner Sits Down with Congressman John Conyers (D-MI) at the Annual Families USA 2008 Conference

Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and Dean of the Congressional Black Caucus, discusses top issues concerning health care as well as possibility of the next President being a Republican.

 

 Ellen Ratner Sits Down with Congressman John Conyers (D-MI) at the Annual Families USA 2008 Conference: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download