Category: US Department of Justice

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta: Owner of Santa Cruz Residential Care Home Arrested for Elder Abuse

    Source: US State of California

    Wednesday, February 5, 2025

    Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov

    SANTA CRUZ – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the arrest and charges against the owner of Rose Garden Residential Care Home and her employee for felony elder abuse that caused the death of a dependent adult in their care. Both defendants have been taken into custody and will face prosecution by the California Department of Justice Division of Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse, for a single count of felony elder abuse each.
     
    “Elders deserve care, respect, and protection,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Those who are responsible for the care of elderly and dependent adults carry a profound duty to ensure their safety and well-being. At the California Department of Justice, we are committed to standing against any form of elder abuse or neglect, and we will take immediate action to hold accountable those who exploit or harm these vulnerable individuals.”
     
    The victim, an 88-year-old dementia patient, was discovered deceased after departing from Rose Garden. The investigation revealed that the staff member responsible for his care fell asleep and was unaware of his absence. Dressed only in a t-shirt and diaper, the victim wandered .4 miles away from Rose Garden and died due to cold exposure. 
     
    It is important to note that criminal charges must be proven in a court of law. Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

    DMFEA works to protect Californians by investigating and prosecuting those responsible for abuse, neglect, and fraud committed against elderly and dependent adults in the state, and those who perpetrate fraud on the Medi-Cal program.
     
    The Division of Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse receives 75 percent of its funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under a grant award totaling $69,244,976 for Federal fiscal year (FY) 2025. The remaining 25 percent is funded by the State of California. FY 2025 is from October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2025.
     
    A copy of the complaint can be found here.
     

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Morgantown Sex Offender Sentenced to 10 Years After Traveling to Mexico to Purchase Child

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – Scott David Bixler, 43, of Morgantown, West Virginia, was sentenced to the statutory maximum sentence of 120 months imprisonment for failing to update his sex offender registration.  Bixler will serve a lifetime of supervision following his prison sentence.

    Bixler is a convicted sex offender and is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORNA) for life.  As part of his registration obligations, he is required to report any international travel. In July of 2023, Bixler fled to Mexico shortly before he was scheduled to appear in state court for sentencing related to criminal convictions for failure to register as a sex offender under West Virginia law.

    When Bixler and his spouse were arrested in Mexico, they possessed two pellet guns, methamphetamine, a cell phone jammer, and a large amount of cash.  The investigation also revealed that the Bixlers were attempting to purchase a young girl while in Mexico.  Fortunately, Mexican authorities thwarted the plan and arrested the couple.

    “The sentence handed down by the Court ensures that the Defendant will be confined in prison for the maximum time allowed by law,” said Acting United States Attorney Randolph J. Bernard.  “I shudder to think what might have happened but for the dedication of AUSA Perri, the federal and state law enforcement agencies, as well as the Mexican authorities.  Our community and children are safer because of their efforts and the sentence imposed.”

    Assistant U.S. Attorney David Perri prosecuted the case on behalf of the government.  The FBI, the U.S. Marshals Services, and the West Virginia State Police investigated this case.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit Justice.gov/PSC.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas S. Kleeh presided.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Attorney’s Office Collects More Than $26 Million in Civil and Criminal Actions in Fiscal Year 2024

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    New Haven – Acting U.S. Attorney Marc H. Silverman today announced that the District of Connecticut collected $26,212,307 in criminal and civil actions in Fiscal Year 2024.  Of this amount, approximately $14,110,085 was collected in criminal actions and approximately $12,102,222 was collected in civil actions.

    The Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office also worked with other U.S. Attorney’s Offices and components of the Department of Justice to collect an additional $20,069 in cases pursued jointly by these offices.

    “In the last fiscal year, our dedicated attorneys and staff have helped to recover more than $26 million,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Silverman.  “These funds are returned directly to crime victims, used to support victim services, and bolster federal, state, and local law enforcement efforts.  Through our criminal prosecutions and civil enforcement actions, we remain steadfast in our commitment to seeking justice, removing illicit profits from wrongdoers, and safeguarding the integrity of crucial government programs.”

    Significant criminal recoveries included more than a $1 million in restitution from multiple defendants involved in a bid rigging scheme related to insulation contracts, and the satisfaction of a restitution obligation from a Connecticut business owner who was required to pay more than $2 million in back taxes, interest, and penalties to the IRS.  Large civil recoveries included approximately $4.5 million from a network of healthcare companies who are alleged to have submitted false claims to Medicare and Connecticut Medicaid for telehealth psychological care services, and more than $1 million from the operators of Connecticut dental practices who are alleged to have paid patient recruiters to steer Connecticut Medicaid patients to their practice, in violation of federal and state laws.

    The U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, along with the department’s litigating divisions, are responsible for enforcing and collecting civil and criminal debts owed to the U.S. and criminal debts owed to federal crime victims.  The law requires defendants to pay restitution to victims of certain federal crimes who have suffered a physical injury or financial loss.  While restitution is paid to the victim, criminal fines and felony assessments are paid to the department’s Crime Victims Fund, which distributes the funds collected to federal and state victim compensation and victim assistance programs.

    Additionally, the Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office, working with partner agencies and divisions, collected $5,525,420 in asset forfeiture actions in FY 2024.  Forfeited assets deposited into the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund are used to restore funds to crime victims and for a variety of law enforcement purposes.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office is charged with enforcing federal criminal laws in Connecticut and representing the federal government in civil litigation.  The Office is composed of approximately 68 Assistant U.S. Attorneys and 57 staff members at offices in New Haven, Bridgeport, and Hartford.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: United States Attorney’s Office Underscores Enforcement of Executive Order on Immigration

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Puerto Rico, through United States Attorney W. Stephen Muldrow, issues the following statement to underscore support for the January 20, 2025, Executive Order, entitled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion.”

    Department of Justice agencies in Puerto Rico, including the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, and the Bureau of Prisons, underscore their support and partnership with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and all its components in Puerto Rico to enforce our nation’s immigration laws.

    The Justice Department and DHS will also continue to collaborate and work closely with our counterparts within the Government of Puerto Rico, to include the Puerto Rico Department of Justice, the Puerto Rico Department of Public Safety, the Puerto Rico Police Bureau, and other governmental agencies, as well as municipal police departments to protect our communities from harm.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office’s implementation of the Executive Order will focus on the apprehension and prosecution of criminal aliens, as well as supporting the prosecution and/or expedited removal from the United States of aliens without legal status. The apprehension and prosecution or removal of aliens includes special interest aliens deemed by the DHS to be from a country that poses a national security or counterintelligence threat.

    “Those aliens who are involved in criminal activity, who are fugitives from justice, who have prior criminal convictions and/or come from nations that pose a threat to our national security, remain a priority for the Department of Justice,” said United States Attorney Muldrow. “We are also fully committed to supporting the efforts of the Department of Homeland Security, and all its components, to make Puerto Rico and the United States safer.”

    “The FBI remains committed to working alongside our law enforcement partners to uphold the rule of law and ensure public safety,” said Joseph González, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s San Juan Field Office. “Through this initiative, continued collaboration and intelligence-driven operations, we are supporting efforts to protect our communities, while adhering to our mission of upholding the Constitution.”

    “Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) is dedicated to identifying and prosecuting individuals who are illegally present in the United States, ensuring they are swiftly removed to their home countries,” said Rebecca González-Ramos, Special Agent in Charge of HSI San Juan. “The executive order aims to protect the United States from individuals who pose a threat to public safety by committing crimes.”

    “The Drug Enforcement Administration remains resolute in its mission to protect the communities of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands from the devastating impact of drug trafficking and transnational criminal organizations. These criminal networks not only threaten public safety through the distribution of dangerous narcotics but also exploit immigration vulnerabilities to further their illicit enterprises. Through intelligence-driven investigations, collaborative enforcement operations, and strategic partnerships with our federal, state, and local counterparts, the DEA will aggressively target those who pose a threat to our national security and the well-being of our citizens. Our enforcement efforts will focus on identifying, disrupting, and prosecuting individuals and organizations engaged in drug trafficking, money laundering, and violent crime. Additionally, we remain committed to supporting the efforts of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice in the apprehension and prosecution of criminal aliens involved in drug-related offenses. The DEA Caribbean Division will continue to conduct high-impact operations aimed at preventing narcotics and criminal elements from infiltrating our shores. These enforcement efforts are crucial in ensuring the safety and security of the people of Puerto Rico and the continental United States. The message is clear: those who attempt to use our territory as a gateway for illicit activities will be met with the full force of federal law enforcement,” stated Michael A. Miranda, Special Agent in Charge of DEA Caribbean Division.

    “We stand in unison with our Federal and Puerto Rico partners in this all-hands-on deck to stem the tide of illegal immigration,” said Christopher A. Robinson, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Miami Field Division.

    The United States Marshals Service, whose mission includes apprehending federal and state fugitives, will lead an initiative – Operation Homeland – to focus resources and coordinate enforcement operations with DOJ and DHS components on the apprehension of alien fugitives charged with federal and local crimes.

    “Historically, the United States Marshals have played a crucial role in serving our nation by apprehending and removing dangerous fugitives from our communities. In this instance, we have teamed up with our federal law enforcement partners to focus on apprehending non-U.S. citizens who have active criminal warrants. We are confident that these collaborative efforts will lead to safer communities. We encourage all citizens to continue cooperating with our investigations to help locate these fugitives and bring them to justice,” said Wilmer Ocasio-Ibarra, U.S. Marshal District of Puerto Rico.

    As recently announced by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), on January 30, 2025, the below-listed individuals entered into Puerto Rican waters without inspection and were detained by the CBP. Earlier that day, Coast Guard had previously boarded the sailing vessel Mistress, but the vessel was allowed to continue its voyage to St. Martin.  Instead of going to St. Martin, the S/V Mistress entered U.S. waters without inspection and anchored off La Parguera, where they were arrested and processed for expedited removal by DHS officials, including the United States Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Specifically, the following eight individuals were encountered on a private boat off the southwest coast of Puerto Rico:

    Name                                    Country of Citizenship

    Erlanbek Narkoziev              Kyrgyzstan

    Jafar Valamatov                    Russia

    Kanal Assylbekov                 Kazakhstan

    Nikita Torshin                       Kazakhstan

    Sanjarjon Sidikov                  Uzbekistan

    Shackhat Uurustamov           Kyrgyzstan

    Odiljon Azimov                     Kyrgyzstan

    Shukrat Akhemodov              Russia

    “Every day CBP Officers are responsible with determining the admissibility of aliens arriving at our ports of entry.  Foreign travelers requesting entry undergo an inspection and determination of admissibility to the United States, and if they are not admissible, they are returned to their point of embarkation,” indicated Roberto Vaquero, Director of the San Juan Office of Field Operations. “Our officers will be vigilant in determining admissibility and will also inspect authorized presence from passengers in domestic flights as they try to reach the Continental US.”

    “The Ramey Sector of the US Border Patrol remains steadfast in protecting our Caribbean borders and deter irregular migration attempts.  U.S. immigration law makes it a crime to enter or attempt to enter without requesting admission at a port of entry designated for that purpose by immigration officials,” stated Reggie Johnson, Acting Chief Patrol Agent. “Migrants should know that they will face full legal consequences of unlawful entry.”

    “Air and Marine Operations agents and assets will support the whole of government effort to enforce immigration laws and protect our borders from emerging threats,” said Christopher Hunter, Director of the Caribbean Air and Marine Branch. “AMO safeguards our Nation by anticipating and confronting security threats through our aviation and maritime law enforcement expertise, innovative capabilities, and partnerships at the border and beyond.”

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Lawyers Appointed to the King’s Counsel

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    Thirteen accomplished Nova Scotian lawyers are being recognized with the distinguished King’s counsel designation.

    Attorney General and Justice Minister Becky Druhan announced the appointments today, February 5.

    “I offer my sincere congratulations to this deserving group of outstanding lawyers,” said Minister Druhan. “This honour recognizes their significant and commendable contributions to our province’s justice system and their profession.”

    The appointees are:

    • Nadine Smillie, Nova Scotia Department of Justice
    • Gregory Hardy, C3 Legal
    • Shawn O’Hara, Nova Scotia Department of Justice
    • Colleen Keyes, Stewart McKelvey
    • Jennifer Glennie, Nova Scotia Department of Justice
    • Kim McOnie, Nova Scotia Public Prosecution Service
    • Shelley Wood, Stewart McKelvey
    • Derek Land, Blackburn English
    • Michael Dull, Valent Law
    • Scott Campbell, Stewart McKelvey
    • Naiomi Metallic, Burchell Wickwire Bryson/Dalhousie University’s Schulich School of Law
    • Robert Kennedy, Nova Scotia Public Prosecution Service
    • Heidi Walsh-Sampson, National Research Council.

    The King’s counsel designation is awarded annually to members of the legal profession to recognize exceptional merit and outstanding contributions to the legal community.

    A formal ceremony to honour the appointees will be held this spring.


    Quick Facts:

    • an independent advisory committee makes King’s counsel recommendations to the attorney general and minister of justice
    • criteria include a minimum of 15 years as a member of the Nova Scotia bar, demonstrated professional integrity and good character

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Fresno Man with Prior Fraud Conviction Pleads Guilty to Running a $4.2 Million Fraud Scheme Through His Technology Startup

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News

    FRESNO, Calif. — Royce Newcomb, 62, of Fresno, pleaded guilty today to wire fraud and money laundering charges today for a long-running fraud scheme where he stole $4.2 million from investors, lenders, and the federal government, Acting U.S. Attorney Michele Beckwith announced.

    According to court documents, from 2017 through 2022, Newcomb owned Strategic Innovations, which was a technology startup company that purported to make smart home and business products meant to stop package theft, prevent weather damage to packages, and make it easier for emergency responders and delivery services to find homes and businesses. Newcomb developed prototypes of his products and received local and national media attention for them. For example, Time Magazine included his eLiT Address Box & Security System, which used mobile networks to pinpoint home and business locations, on its Best Inventions of 2021 list.

    Newcomb made several false representations to his investors to deceive and cheat them out of their money. The false representations included that he had been awarded a grant by the National Science Foundation and that he would use the investors’ money to further develop and bring his products to market. That was not true. Instead, Newcomb used the money to pay for gambling, a Mercedes and Jaguar, and a mansion. He also used the money to pay for refunds to other investors who wanted out, and to pay for new, unrelated projects without the investors’ authorization.

    During this period, Newcomb also received a fraudulent COVID-19 loan for more than $70,000 from the Small Business Administration and fraudulent loans for more than $190,000 from private lenders. He lied about Strategic Innovations having hundreds of thousands and even millions in revenue to get these loans.

    Newcomb was previously convicted federally in 2011 for running a real estate fraud scheme in Sacramento. He was sentenced to more than five years in prison for that offense, and he was on federal supervised release for that offense when he committed the offenses charged in this case.

    This case is the product of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joseph Barton and Jeffrey Spivak are prosecuting the case.

    Newcomb is scheduled to be sentenced on May 5, 2025. Newcomb faces maximum statutory penalties of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for the wire fraud charge, and 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for the money laundering charge. The actual sentence, however, will be determined at the discretion of the court after consideration of any applicable statutory factors and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which take into account a number of variables.

    This effort is part of a California COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Strike Force operation, one of five interagency COVID-19 fraud strike force teams established by the U.S. Department of Justice. The California Strike Force combines law enforcement and prosecutorial resources in the Eastern and Central Districts of California and focuses on large-scale, multistate pandemic relief fraud perpetrated by criminal organizations and transnational actors. The strike forces use prosecutor-led and data analyst-driven teams to identify and bring to justice those who stole pandemic relief funds. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Columbus Man Admits Attempted Transfer of Obscene Material to Minor in Undercover Investigation

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News

    BILLINGS — A Columbus man accused of attempting to send obscene material to a minor during an undercover investigation admitted to a charge today, U.S. Attorney Jesse Laslovich said.

    The defendant, Jacob Curtis Wyckoff, 25, pleaded guilty to an information charging him with attempted transfer of obscene material to a minor. Wyckoff faces a maximum of 10 years in prison, a $250,000 fine and three years of supervised release.

    U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy J. Cavan presided. A sentencing date will be set before U.S. District Judge Susan P. Watters. The court will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Wyckoff was released pending further proceedings.

    In court documents, the government alleged that in January 2023, law enforcement in the Billings area set up an undercover operation relating to those with a sexual interest in children. The undercover persona was that of a 14-year-old female. The undercover posed on a social media site and on Jan. 26, 2023, Wyckoff reached out on KIK, using the profile name of “Jake Smith.” The undercover made Wyckoff aware in communications that she was “almost 15.” In communications between the two from January 2023 to July 14, 2023, discussions became increasingly sexual in nature. On multiple occasions, Wyckoff expressed a desire to meet the “child” for a sexual encounter. On July 6, 2023, Wyckoff sent the undercover a picture of his allegedly erect penis in his jeans and made sexually suggestive comments.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office is prosecuting the case. The FBI, Yellowstone County Sheriff’s Office, Laurel Police Department, and Montana Division of Criminal Investigations conducted the investigation.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit Justice.gov/PSC.

    XXX

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Durbin Leads Judiciary Committee Colleagues In Speaking Out Against Pam Bondi’s Nomination To Be Attorney General

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin

    February 04, 2025

    Durbin’s and Judiciary Democrats’ floor speeches come ahead of Bondi’s confirmation vote and after the Trump Administration forced out dozens of DOJ and FBI officials this weekend and is now threatening additional action against thousands of employees across the country who worked on investigations related to January 6 and President Trump

    WASHINGTON – In a speech on the Senate floor, U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke out against Pam Bondi, President Trump’s Attorney General nominee, ahead of her confirmation vote. In his remarks, Durbin cited concerns over Ms. Bondi’s ability to act as an independent Attorney General. These concerns are especially pertinent as the Trump Administration purges dozens of senior career civil servants at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)—including longtime nonpartisan leaders of the government’s counterterrorism and counterespionage efforts—further exemplifying the need for an independent DOJ.

    Durbin was joined on the Senate floor by Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to speak out against Ms. Bondi’s nomination before the Senate proceeds to her confirmation vote.

    “Shortly, Senate Republicans will confirm the nomination of Pam Bondi to serve as Attorney General and lead the Department of Justice in the new Administration. Yesterday, I came to the Senate floor to discuss the Trump Administration’s decision to purge Justice Department officials and warn that Ms. Bondi’s record suggests that she will aid in this effort to pack the Department of Justice with loyalists seeking retribution against President Trump’s political rivals,” Durbin said. “Since the Watergate era, there has been bipartisan support for the principle that the Department of Justice investigations and prosecutions must be independent from the White House. Over the years, both Republicans and Democrats have asked many individuals seeking the office of Attorney General one basic question—would you be willing to tell the President ‘no?’ Given that Ms. Bondi—when speaking about President Trump’s criminal indictments—threatened ‘the prosecutors will be prosecuted’ and ‘the investigators will be investigated,’ I have serious doubts about her willingness to really say ‘no’ to this President.”

    Durbin went on to outline that his concerns are even more pressing because, over the last 16 days, the Trump Administration has purged dozens of senior career law enforcement officials at the Department of Justice and FBI. This purge has been particularly focused on dedicated, nonpartisan prosecutors and investigators working in the National Security Division and the FBI.

    “On its first day, the Trump Administration removed or reassigned as many as 20 experienced professionals with invaluable national security expertise without any comparable replacements, including the veteran career deputy assistant attorneys general in the National Security Division… Those who have been reassigned are reportedly being put in roles concerning immigration enforcement, for which they have little expertise… Since then, dozens more senior officials have been removed,” Durbin said. “This shameless partisan retribution is only the beginning. It has been reported that the future FBI Director will be guided by an advisory committee composed of solely partisan political operators, including an associate of Elon Musk… These actions will cripple FBI field offices and U.S. Attorneys’ offices across the country by increasing the caseload for the remaining agents, dramatically slowing down critical investigations and prosecutions.”

    Durbin continued, “As America faces a heightened threat landscape, these shocking removals and reassignments of hundreds of employees deprive the Department of Justice and the FBI of experienced leadership and decades of experience fighting violent crime, espionage, and terrorism.”

    Durbin concluded, “For years, my Republican colleagues have claimed they ‘Back the Blue,’ and accused Democrats of being ‘soft on crime.’ We’ve heard it over and over and over. But now, as President Trump is gutting our nation’s law enforcement agencies and putting our national security at risk, my Republican colleagues do not complain—they are nowhere to be found. Instead of condemning these actions, they will likely come to the Senate floor tonight and confirm an individual to lead the Department of Justice who is in lockstep with this policy of President Trump—and was chosen for the role specifically because she’s loyal. I urge my colleagues to consider what a danger President Trump and Pam Bondi present to this nation. I will oppose her confirmation and hope my colleagues will do the same.”

    Video of Durbin’s remarks on the floor is available here.

    Audio of Durbin’s remarks on the floor is available here.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Durbin Votes Against Pam Bondi To Be Attorney General

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin

    February 04, 2025

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today voted against President Trump’s pick to be Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi. The Senate voted to confirm her nomination by a vote of 54-46.

    “Given the massive upheaval that President Trump has caused at the Justice Department in just his first few days in office—including purging dozens of senior career law enforcement officials at DOJ and FBI and the potentially unlawful targeting of thousands more—the next Attorney General will have her work cut out for her. As I said during Ms. Bondi’s hearing, it is absolutely critical that any nominee for Attorney General be committed first and foremost to the Constitution and the American people—not the President and his political agenda. Unfortunately, I am unconvinced that Ms. Bondi shares my belief. She is one of four personal lawyers of President Trump that he has already selected for top positions at the Department of Justice, has echoed President Trump’s calls for exacting revenge on his political opponents, and has undermined our democracy by joining in President Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

    “In light of the Trump Administration’s actions over the course of the past week, the question of whether Ms. Bondi will be able to tell the President ‘no’ is even more critical. I did not receive a satisfactory answer from Ms. Bondi during her confirmation hearing. Since Watergate, there has been bipartisan support for the idea that the Justice Department must be independent from the White House. President Trump’s conduct during his first term underscored the need for this independence. I do not believe that Ms. Bondi will provide it. Today I voted ‘no’ on her nomination.”

    To view Durbin’s questions to Ms. Bondi in her confirmation hearing, click here and here.

    Yesterday, Durbin led all Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats in letters to Ms. Bondi; nominee to be the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Kash Patel; nominee to be Deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche; as well as the Acting Attorney General, James McHenry; and Acting FBI Director, Brian Driscoll, about the removal or reassignment across DOJ and FBI of career law enforcement officials. Last week, the Trump Administration reportedly purged dozens of DOJ and FBI officials involved in prosecuting Donald Trump and the January 6 rioters and is now threatening additional action against thousands of employees across the country who worked on investigations related to the attack on the Capitol.

    Durbin also outlined concerns regarding her nomination in a speech on the Senate floor yesterday.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer Delivers Remarks at Press Conference Announcing Criminal and Civil Actions Related to Unlawful Advertising and Sale of Dietary Supplements

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Good afternoon.

    We are here today to explain critical steps the federal government is taking to stem the tide of unlawful dietary supplements being sold to consumers nationwide. 

    Almost every day, news sources on the Internet, television and in print feature stories about the dangers of dietary supplements:  A supplement is laced with an undeclared pharmaceutical ingredient.  A study is released about adverse health consequences of a so-called natural remedy.  An athlete or member of the military falls ill after taking an untested energy product.  These stories arise across the country all too often. 

    Consumers turn to supplements when they want to lose weight, get an edge in athletic performance, or improve their overall well-being.  From California to Maine, consumers ingest pills, powders and liquids every day, not knowing whether they are wasting money or whether they may end up harming, rather than helping, themselves.  Unfortunately, many of these products are not what they purport to be or cannot do what the distributors claim they can do.  In some instances, consumers might be choosing supplements over other, proven therapies for serious conditions under the mistaken belief that these products can help.

    I am honored to be joined at the podium today by my colleagues from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA).  Today we are announcing a sweep of actions targeting unlawful dietary supplement makers and marketers.  Over the past year, we have pursued civil and criminal cases against more than 100 makers and marketers of dietary supplements and similar products. 

    A centerpiece of the sweep announced today is the indictment of USPlabs, relating to widely popular workout and weight loss supplements.  Bestselling dietary supplements, with names like Jack3d, OxyElite Pro, and OxyElite Pro “New Formula” and “Advanced Formula,” raked in hundreds of millions of dollars in sales.

    As alleged in the indictment unsealed today, the defendants were on a perpetual search for the next miracle ingredient.  That search generally focused on Chinese chemical manufacturers.  When they found an ingredient that they believed was promising – and knowing full well how the market for dietary supplements operated – they doctored packaging, labeling, and other paperwork to defraud others about what the product was.  Much of the alleged fraud focused on the defendants’ claims that their products were made from natural plant extracts.  In truth, as one defendant put it, “lol stuff is completely 100 % synthethic [sic]”.

    These fraudulent claims ensured that the synthetic chemicals entered the United States, got on store shelves, and were purchased by consumers.  As alleged in the indictment, the defendants falsified paperwork to stay off the radar of regulatory agencies – when the products crossed the border and as they circulated in commerce.  They made misrepresentations to convince well-known retailers, who had concerns about untested synthetic chemicals, to sell their products.  They falsified labeling and marketing materials to convince consumers, who prized natural ingredients, to buy their products.  All of these people – regulators, retailers and consumers – trusted that the defendants were telling the truth about their products.  All of these people were deceived.

    This deception put lives at risk.  The indictment describes the safety testing – or, more accurately, the lack of safety testing – that the defendants undertook before hawking these factory-made stimulants.  For instance, the indictment alleges that the defendants sometimes tested the ingredients on themselves and sold the ones that made them feel good.  With one product, the defendants allegedly recognized that the substance could potentially cause “liver toxicity.”  Yet without conducting a single test to determine whether that substance was safe, they went ahead and sold it, working from the baseless assumption that they weren’t using enough of the substance in their products to cause problems. 

    But there were problems.  There was an outbreak of liver injuries allegedly associated with the OxyElite Pro New Formula.  Consumers experienced jaundice; several needed transplants to save their lives.  How did the defendants respond?  As the indictment alleges, they promised the FDA and the public that they would stop distributing the product at issue.  They didn’t.  Instead, they undertook a surreptitious, all-hands-on-deck effort to sell as much of the product as they could.

    We are here today, in part, to take an important step in holding USPlabs accountable for its actions.  The indictment unsealed today charges USPlabs in Texas, four of its executives, and one of its consultants with a series of crimes associated with the sale of dietary supplements.  Charged with these defendants is S.K. Laboratories based in Southern California, which manufactured many of USPlabs’ products, and one of S.K. Laboratories’ executives.  As noted, this is just a step.  All of the defendants will have their day in court.  Whatever the outcome, I am confident that the dedicated men and women – from the Department of Justice and the special agents from the FDA and IRS Criminal Investigation – who have worked so hard to bring us to this point will ensure that justice is served.

    The allegations against USPlabs and its operators should serve as a wake-up call to the supplement industry.  The unmistakable message is that the Department of Justice and its partners will be vigilant when it comes to the health and safety of the American public.  Fighting illegal activity in the dietary supplement industry is a high priority on our consumer protection agenda.

    The USPlabs case is only one of the many cases brought as part of the sweep announced today.  Over the past year, law enforcement and regulatory officials have focused efforts on many additional products that cause high levels of concern among health officials nationwide.

    Many of the cases we have brought relate to products that misrepresent the ingredients they contain. 

    We have also brought cases involving products that make unsupported claims about their effects.  In numerous matters, the defendants are selling products online through websites and touting their products to consumers for the cure, treatment, or prevention of diseases ranging from cancer to Alzheimer’s disease to herpes.  Making these disease cure claims defines these products as drugs under the law.  And even though they were warned by the FDA – and in some cases, through joint letters with the FTC – to stop making such claims, a number of the individuals and companies at issue continued to make these claims and promote their products as treatments or cures for diseases.  Yet these drugs lack substantial evidence of safety and effectiveness.  They are also being sold without adequate directions for their use.  Selling them in interstate commerce in these circumstances is illegal. 

    The government is taking a multi-faceted approach to combat the problem of unlawful dietary supplements.  In addition to criminal actions, we are using civil and administrative tools to safeguard consumers from harmful products.  As part of this sweep, the Department of Justice brought a dozen civil injunctive actions (including five in the last week) under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and in some cases, using the civil mail fraud injunction statute, seeking to stop the defendant entities and individuals from violating the law.  In these cases we are asking the courts to order the defendants to stop their illegal conduct and to put in place processes and procedures to prevent them from violating the law in the future.  Our partner agencies, including the FTC, FDA, USPIS, DoD and USADA, are taking other measures both to enforce the law and to educate the public.

    As I mentioned, I stand here in partnership with other agencies with whom we have joined forces to address this problem.  Through enforcement and education, each agency is performing its own mission to protect consumers or service members or athletes from dangerous, ineffective products.  You will hear more from my colleagues about the actions their agencies are taking.  Together, through cooperation and teamwork, we can multiply the impact of our efforts.  These actions will not put an end to this widespread problem.  But they will go some distance toward bringing change to the industry.

    We are not here to criticize the entire supplement marketplace.  Not every supplement contains an undisclosed ingredient.  Not every label lies about what is contained in the bottle.  Not every claim about dietary supplements is unsupported by scientific evidence.

    But consumers must be on guard before taking dietary supplements.  Oftentimes, it may be difficult or impossible to tell the conditions under which the supplements are manufactured, and it is challenging to sort through real scientific substantiation for a product as compared to unsupported hype.

    How can consumers perform their own due diligence? 

    Talk to your health care provider.  At physical exams, ask a physician whether the bottle seen on store shelves or on the Internet could cause you harm, or whether it is worth the money you are spending to buy it.

    Consult the public education materials provided by the FTC, FDA, DoD and USADA.  The FDA’s website, for example, includes tips for making informed decisions and evaluating dietary supplements, and the FTC’s website also has a wealth of information. 

    The Department of Defense and USADA have developed extraordinary tools, including a cell phone app, to help consumers make informed choices about supplements.

    This is only the beginning.  Thanks to the partnerships we have built, our efforts in this area will continue.  We will keep investigating violators and we will use all available tools at our disposal to advance our enforcement goals and to protect consumers.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Statement at Briefing to Discuss the U.S. Government’s Ongoing Counterterrorism Efforts

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    As I’ve said previously, we stand in solidarity with the people of France at this difficult time.  We are committed to providing any and all assistance to our allies in Europe and around the world as we all face this global threat.  Now we’ve made that commitment clear, not just with words, but with our actions.  The Department of Justice, the FBI and other agencies are in close contact with French authorities, through our international legal assistance channels, to provide support to the French in their ongoing investigation, to coordinate strategies with them, and to advance our shared efforts as we obtain further information that may be relevant to these attacks.  We are operating on an expedited basis, as well, to ensure that the victim assistance professionals at the Department of Justice and the FBI are available to assist the victims and their families.  We’ve also expanded the FBI’s legal attaché office in Paris to offer assistance on an as-needed basis, and we have personnel working day and night to respond to any additional requests for assistance.  Now earlier today, President Obama spoke by phone with President Hollande to discuss the latest developments in the investigation and to reaffirm our partnership in the fight against terrorism.

    Now of course, our highest priority is and will remain the security of our homeland and the safety of all Americans.  At the Department of Justice, we are operating around the clock, as we have since 9/11 and even before, to uncover and disrupt any plot that take aim at our people, our infrastructure and our way of life.  We take all threats seriously, we’re acting aggressively to defuse threats as they emerge, and we are vigorously investigating and prosecuting those who seek to harm the American people. 

    In fact, since 2013, we have charged more than 70 individuals for conduct related to foreign-fighter interests and homegrown violent extremism, and we continue to take robust actions to monitor and to thwart potential extremist activity.  The Department of Justice and the FBI are working closely with the Department of Homeland Security, with the broader intelligence community and our partners around the world in all of these efforts, and we are bringing every resource to bear in the service of our mission.

    As I think it’s important to note, that as we do this work, we are guided, obviously, by our commitment to the protection of the American people, but also by our commitment to the protection of our American values, which include the timeless principles of inclusivity and freedom that have always made this country great.  We need to say, we will not let our actions be overtaken by fear, and we will not allow merchants of violence to rob us of our most precious ideals.  Our values are not secondary considerations in the fight against terror – they are central to the work that we do, and they are essential to the nation that we protect.  They are also the reason that we are a target, and they are what terrorists want most to see us abandon.  They want us to live in fear, and we refuse.  They want us to change who we are, and what makes us quintessentially American, and that we will never do.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Director Tracy Toulou of the Office of Tribal Justice Testifies Before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Oversight Hearing “Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) — Five Years Later: How Have the Justice Systems in Indian Country Improved?”

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Chairman Barrasso, Vice-Chairman Tester and Members of the Committee:

    I am honored to appear before you to discuss the implementation efforts of the Department of Justice to fulfill our responsibilities as established in the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (TLOA) and, ultimately, to improve public safety in Indian country.  In introducing this Act in April 2009, Chairman Dorgan illuminated some of the hard realities faced by tribes in modern times, including: astonishingly high rates of violence, criminal exploitation of complex and sometimes confusing jurisdiction and crippling limitations on the legal authorities of tribal governments to ensure safety on their lands.  The introduction of TLOA included a charge to the federal government to provide tribal governments with the tools they need to better protect their communities, to live up to our treaty and trust obligations and to be more accountable for our efforts to enhance public safety in Indian country.  Thank you for the opportunity to provide an overview of the department’s efforts over the past five years to fulfill our responsibilities under this Act and honor our broader obligations to Indian country.  

    In October 2009, the department held a listening session with tribal leaders to help guide and inform the department’s policies, programs and activities affecting Indian country going forward.  Our leadership recognized the need to swiftly and meaningfully improve our contributions to public safety in Indian country and as a result of this listening session, launched a department-wide initiative to enhance public safety in Indian country, which is ongoing.  With the passage of TLOA in July 2010, the department’s initiative expanded to absorb new responsibilities and assumed a renewed sense of urgency.  Our work to enhance public safety has been and continues to be, shaped by our commitment to empower tribal governments; to improve coordination and collaboration at the federal, tribal, state and local levels; and to be appropriately accountable for the work we do.

    Empowering Tribal Governments

    The department views tribes as partners in ensuring public safety in Indian country and is committed to maximizing tribal control over tribal affairs.  It is our belief, informed by experience, that challenges faced by tribes are generally best met by tribal solutions.  In support of this commitment and the government-to-government nature of our relationships with tribes, the department has worked to fulfill its responsibilities under TLOA in a way that will ultimately empower tribes to operate with more autonomy.

    In order to support law enforcement activity by tribal officials in Indian country, tribes require access to law enforcement databases.  Under TLOA, the department must ensure that tribal law enforcement officials have access to national crime information databases.  The ability of tribes to fully engage in national criminal justice information sharing via state networks, which are the long-time conduit for such activities, has been dependent upon regulations, statutes and policies of the states that may not consistently enable tribal participation.  In order to improve access for tribes, the department has established two new programs and partnered on a third.

    First, the Justice Telecommunications System (JUST) program, which was launched in 2010, provided participating tribes with access to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC).  This program is ongoing and currently serves 23 tribes.  This program, as well as the other two programs to improve data base access, were the result of on-going, substantive dialog with tribal governments and law enforcement.  

    Second, the department recently launched a more comprehensive access program based on feedback from tribes and lessons learned from the JUST program: the Department of Justice’s Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP).  The TAP program, first announced in August 2015, is designed to provide access to CJIS services, including: Next Generation Identification (NGI); National Data Exchange (N-DEx); Law Enforcement Enterprise Portal (LEEP); National Crime Information Center (NCIC); National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS); and Nlets, the International Justice and Public Safety Network.  Nlets is an interstate public safety network for the exchange of law enforcement, criminal justice and public safety information owned by the states.  Nlets supports inquiry into state databases, such as motor vehicle, driver’s license and criminal history, as well as inquiry into several federal databases, such as Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) Drug Pointer Index, ICE’s Law Enforcement Support Center and FAA’s Aircraft Registration and Canada’s Canadian Police Information Center.  With funding from the Office of Justice Programs’ (OJP) Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART), the TAP program has selected ten tribal participants to help provide user feedback on the training, technical assistance, equipment, and maintenance of this program.  Early feedback has been very positive and it is our intention to eventually make this program available to any interested tribe.  We will continue to work with Congress for additional funding to more broadly deploy the program.

    The TAP Program was the result of a 2014 working group, which consisted of representatives from the Departments of Justice and the Interior.  From this same close collaboration, the department partnered with Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS) in a third program known as  “BIA Purpose Code X,” which gives tribes the ability through BIA-OJS to perform emergency name-based background checks for child placement purposes.  This is a crucial capability for tribal social service agencies seeking emergency placement of children in Indian country.

    The Department of Justice has increased its efforts to support tribal governments that are exercising expanded sentencing authority rooted in TLOA.  While TLOA properly does not require the department to review or certify a tribe’s use of enhanced felony sentencing authority or the status of a tribe’s efforts to amend its codes and court processes to provide defendants with the due process protections described in TLOA, we have taken steps to help ensure that tribes interested in exercising enhanced sentencing authority have knowledge of and access to relevant resources.  For example, OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance’s Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance Program has provided training and technical services to support tribal civil and criminal legal procedures, legal infrastructure enhancements, public education and the development and enhancement of tribal justice systems.  More specifically, training and technical services have included the following: indigent legal defense services; civil legal assistance; public defender services; and strategies for the development and enhancement of tribal court policies, procedures and codes.

    The provision of high-quality training to tribal representatives has been an area of increased activity within the department since the passage of TLOA.  The department believes that ensuring access to quality training is a necessary element to bolstering tribal autonomy.  In July 2010, the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA) launched the National Indian Country Training Initiative (NICTI) to ensure that federal prosecutors and agents, as well as state and tribal criminal justice personnel, receive the training and support needed to address the particular challenges relevant to Indian country prosecutions.  Importantly, the department covers the costs of travel and lodging for tribal attendees at classes sponsored by the NICTI. This allows many tribal criminal justice officials to receive cutting-edge training from national experts at no cost to the student or tribe.  The NICTI has sponsored approximately 75 training courses, and reached over 200 tribal, federal and state agencies.

    Additionally, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced a forthcoming training course to be held at the FLETC campus in Artesia, New Mexico.  Jointly taught by FBI and BIA “mentors” and FLETC common core instructors, the course will include instruction in forensic evidence collection and preparatory instruction on investigations common to Indian country, such as domestic violence, child abuse, violent crimes, human trafficking and drug trafficking.  This course will be held four times each year, with a total of 24 students in each session.  This course, the result of collaboration between FBI, BIA and FLETC, was developed out of a recognized need to train federal and tribal law enforcement officers together.  Another recent training was held by the DEA.  In September 2015, the National Native American Law Enforcement Association held a collaborative training event where the DEA provided on-site training on clandestine lab awareness for first responders, emerging technologies, and money laundering.  The training included federal, state, local, and tribal partners with Indian country responsibility.   

    One of the most meaningful displays of the department’s commitment to a government-to-government relationship with tribes is in our efforts to cross-deputize tribal law enforcement officials.  In doing so, we not only expand their authorities, but we send an important message that we are partners and allies with tribes in our collective efforts to enhance public safety in Indian country.  The Special Assistant U.S. Attorney (SAUSA) Program was developed prior to the passage of TLOA to train tribal prosecutors in federal criminal law, procedure and investigative techniques to increase prosecutions in federal court, tribal court, or both.  The program enables tribal prosecutors to bring cases in federal court and to serve as co-counsel with federal prosecutors on felony investigations and prosecutions of offenses originating in tribal communities.  The program has grown considerably since the passage of TLOA.  To date, there are 25 SAUSAs representing 23 tribes.  In addition to the SAUSA program, the Department of Justice investigative agencies have cross-deputized tribal law enforcement officers through joint task forces.  For example, the FBI has deputized 85 tribal law enforcement officers as part of the Safe Trails Task Forces.  There are currently 15 active Safe Trails Task Forces located around the country, working to combat violent crime, drugs, gangs and gaming violations. 

    In 2014, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) fulfilled a key provision of TLOA by accepting certain tribal offenders sentenced in tribal courts for placement in BOP institutions.  The pilot program allowed any federally-recognized tribe to request that the BOP incarcerate a tribal member convicted of a violent crime under the terms of Section 234 of TLOA and authorized the BOP to house up to 100 tribal offenders at a time, nationwide.

    A fundamental goal of the BOP is to reduce future criminal activity by encouraging inmates to participate in a range of programs that have been proven to help them adopt a crime-free lifestyle upon their return to the community.  Through the pilot program, tribal offenders have access to the BOP’s many self-improvement programs, including work in prison industries and other institution jobs, vocational training, education, treatment for substance use disorders, classes on parenting and anger management, counseling, religious observance opportunities and other programs that teach essential life skills.  BOP has also ensured that there are culturally-appropriate offerings for native inmates.  In addition to increasing access to critical programs and treatments, the pilot program facilitated tribes’ ability to exercise enhanced sentencing authority under TLOA, which is an important indication of support for tribal sovereignty.  The pilot program was, by all accounts, a success and both tribes and the department would be supportive of necessary Congressional action to reauthorize this program.

    An important part of our support to tribes is necessarily tied to funds.  The department launched the Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation (CTAS) in 2010, as a response to tribes’ request for increased flexibility.  Through CTAS, tribes and tribal consortia are able to submit a single application to apply for a broad range of the Department of Justice tribal grant programs.  Through CTAS, the department has awarded over 1,400 grants totaling more than $620 million.  Over time, we have refined this solicitation to enable tribes to take a truly comprehensive approach to improving public safety in tribal communities.  Under TLOA, the department was required to offer specific grants for delinquency prevention and response and to include dedicated funding for regional information sharing.  To date, we have awarded more than $44 million in support of tribal youth programs and more than $108 million to support regional information sharing systems.  The department continually seeks feedback from tribes on ways to improve CTAS and each year with our solicitation announcement we also communicate steps we have taken during the previous year to improve the process.  The most recent solicitation was released on Nov. 19, 2015, with an application deadline of Feb. 23, 2016.  It incorporates a number of changes, including the elimination of certain eligibility requirements, broadening allowable activities and extending the award period for certain grants.  Each year, the intention is to increase the accessibility and usefulness of CTAS grants.   

    In parallel to our outward-facing efforts, the department has made a number of internal structural changes to ensure our revamped presence in Indian country is long-lived.

    Evolution of Agency Infrastructure 

    To ensure that the day-to-day operations at the department are supportive of the policy and programmatic changes we have made since the passage of TLOA, we have made a number of internal adjustments across the department, from headquarters to field offices.  The intent in making these changes was to absorb the principles that drive the TLOA and our response to that Act, thus integrating them into the way we do business at the department.  Indeed, although not a direct response to TLOA, the department issued Attorney General Guidelines Stating Principles for Working with Federally Recognized Tribes (Statement of Principles) in December 2014 to guide and inform all of the department’s interactions with federally-recognized tribes.  This Statement of Principles serves as a point of reference for department employees and, importantly, a standard to which tribes can hold the department accountable.  

    In 1995, then-Attorney General Janet Reno established the Office of Tribal Justice (OTJ).  OTJ has operated continuously since then, although it was not made permanent until the passage of TLOA.  On Nov. 17, 2010, less than four months after TLOA’s enactment, the department published in the Federal Register a final rule that established OTJ as a permanent, standalone component of the department.  My office serves as a principal point of contact in the department for federally-recognized tribes, provides legal, policy and programmatic advice to the Attorney General with respect to the treaty and trust relationship between the United States and Indian tribes, promotes internal uniformity of department policies and litigation positions relating to Indian country and coordinates with other federal agencies and with state and local governments on their initiatives in Indian country. 

    The U.S. Attorneys’ Offices with Indian country in their districts play a primary role in our interactions with tribes.  U.S. Attorneys’ Offices often are the nexus of activity when federal involvement on reservations is necessary, from investigations to prosecutions to providing services to victims.  Every U.S Attorney’s Office, whose district includes Indian country or a federally-recognized tribe, has at least one Tribal Liaison and some districts have more than one.  Along with the TLOA-driven requirement that each relevant office appoint a Tribal Liaison, the U.S. Attorneys are required to hold annual consultations with tribes in their districts.  In order to assist the U.S. Attorney’s Offices and the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee’s Native American Issues Subcommittee, as well as to serve as a liaison to other department components, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys formally established the position of Native American Issues Coordinator.          

    These changes to the structure of the department were driven by the department’s support for and fulfillment of its responsibilities under TLOA.  There have been a series of policy shifts that are not a direct response to the Act but are in keeping with the spirit of that legislation.  For example, the issuance of the Department of Justice Statement of Principles, discussed earlier, marks an important shift in our approach at all levels of the department to interacting with tribes.  Similarly, the Department of Justice Consultation Policy is based on three guiding principles: that the department must engage with tribal nations on a government-to-government basis; that tribal sovereignty and Indian self-determination are now and must always be, the foundations of every policy or program; and that communication and coordination with our tribal partners, among federal agencies and with our state and local counterparts are essential to accountability and to success.

    Greater Accountability

    Accountability is a critical element in a true partnership and the department has taken a number of steps to increase our accountability to tribes.  The TLOA-mandated reports were intended to promote greater transparency of department activities in Indian country and the process of responding has been a useful exercise for our agency to scrutinize trends and patterns of activity.  In some cases, the reports have revealed a need to expand our agency response to meet specific needs and organize our resources more effectively, such as those related to long-term detention.  In other cases, the reporting process highlighted positive impacts that department activity has had in Indian country over time and a need to perpetuate beneficial initiatives, such as the BOP pilot program report and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Report.  In tracking prosecutions and crime data, the department has benefitted from taking a focused look at our response to trends in Indian country and as a result is in a better position to adjust our resources internally to address emerging trends and issues.

    The department has made progress over the past five years in bolstering our government-to-government relationship with tribes and in honoring our treaty and trust obligations.  We are all fully cognizant that there is significant work still to be done to live up to our responsibilities in Indian country and we are committed to seeing this work through.  We appreciate Congress’ efforts to foster public safety and look forward to working closely with our partners in Indian country to fully honor our responsibilities.  I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.    

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at Press Conference Announcing Law Enforcement Action Related to FIFA

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Good afternoon, and thank you all for being here.  I know for many of you, the horrific events of San Bernardino are at the top of your mind.  I do want to take a moment before we begin to address yesterday’s shooting.  The FBI has a leadership role in the investigation, working in conjunction with state and local law enforcement, as well as the ATF and U.S. Marshals Service.  And as this investigation unfolds, we intend to provide any and all assistance necessary to local authorities and to the people of San Bernardino who have been so profoundly affected by this unspeakable crime. 

    As I said this morning, I know that I stand with all Americans when I say that my thoughts and prayers – and those of my colleagues at every level of the Department of Justice – are with the families and loved ones of the victims, and with the brave public safety officials who put themselves in harm’s way in order to save others.

    I am joined today by U.S. Attorney [Robert] Capers of the Eastern District of New York, Director [James] Comey of the FBI and Chief of Investigation [Richard] Weber of the IRS’s Criminal Investigation Division.  Six months ago, the Department of Justice announced a 47-count indictment charging 14 defendants with pervasive and long-running conspiracies in the world of organized soccer.  We alleged that the defendants – including high-ranking FIFA officials; leaders of governing bodies under the FIFA umbrella; and sports marketing executives – had corrupted the business of worldwide soccer to serve their interests and enrich themselves.  We stated our determination to end these practices; to root out corruption; and to bring wrongdoers to justice.  And we pledged to work with our partners around the world to hold additional co-conspirators and corrupt individuals accountable.

    Today, we are announcing a superseding indictment, which includes new charges against new defendants, as well as additional arrests and guilty pleas in connection with our ongoing investigation.  A federal grand jury in Brooklyn has returned a 92-count superseding indictment, which includes charges against 16 new defendants, all of whom are current or former soccer officials.  These defendants include the sitting presidents of two of FIFA’s six continental soccer confederations – CONCACAF, which covers North and Central America and the Caribbean, and CONMEBOL, which covers South America.  Both of these defendants, Alfredo Hawit of Honduras and Juan Ángel Napout of Paraguay, are also FIFA vice presidents and members of its executive committee.  In addition, the superseding indictment charges high-ranking officials of other soccer governing bodies, including current and former presidents of national soccer federations in Central and South America.  Each of the 16 new defendants is charged with racketeering conspiracy and other crimes in connection with their sustained abuse of their positions for financial gain.

    Earlier today, Swiss authorities arrested two of the new defendants, Alfredo Hawit and Juan Angel Napout, as they gathered to attend FIFA meetings in Zurich.  We are now working to extradite those defendants to the United States, just as we are working to secure the arrest and extradition of additional defendants residing in other countries.

    In addition to naming new defendants, the superseding indictment also expands the bribery and corruption charges set forth in the original indictment unsealed last May.  In the original indictment, we alleged that between 1991 and the present, two generations of soccer officials conspired to solicit and receive well over $200 million, often through an alliance with sports marketing executives who sought to obtain lucrative contracts and shut out competitors through the systematic payment of bribes and kickbacks.  We also alleged bribes and kickbacks in connection with the sponsorship of the Brazilian soccer federation by a major U.S. sportswear company, the selection of the host country for the 2010 World Cup and the 2011 FIFA presidential election. 

    The new charges highlight corruption schemes principally involving soccer officials in Central and South America and sports-marketing companies based in South America and the United States.  Consistent with the intergenerational nature of the corruption schemes, they involve payments relating to tournaments that have already been played, as well as matches scheduled into the next decade – including multiple cycles of FIFA World Cup qualifiers and international friendly matches involving six Central American member associations; a bribery scheme relating to the sale of broadcasting rights implicating nearly all of the top CONMEBOL officials; and an Argentinian sports marketing company’s scheme to bribe Central American soccer officials.  Not content to hijack the world’s most popular sport for decades of ill-gotten gains, these defendants, as alleged, sought to institutionalize their corruption to ensure that it lived on, not for the good of the game but for their own personal aggrandizement and gain.

    The roles of several of the defendants in these schemes illustrate the depth as well as the persistence of the alleged corruption.  The defendant Héctor Trujillo currently serves as a judge on the Constitutional Court of Guatemala, purportedly dispensing justice by day while allegedly soliciting bribes and selling his influence within FIFA.  Another, Alfredo Hawit, ascended to the position of CONCACAF president that was left open when we charged his predecessor with corruption in May – and then, as alleged, assumed the mantle of those same corrupt practices.  The defendant Ariel Alvarado is a member of FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee, entrusted with stamping out the corrupt behavior in which he is now alleged to be involved. 

    The betrayal of trust set forth here is outrageous.  The scale of corruption alleged herein is unconscionable.  And the message from this announcement should be clear to every culpable individual who remains in the shadows, hoping to evade our investigation: You will not wait us out.  You will not escape our focus. 

    Many have already heeded that warning.  Today, I can report that eight additional defendants have agreed to plead guilty for their involvement in the corruption schemes we have outlined.  After the initial charges were filed in May, these eight defendants came forward and accepted responsibility for their criminal conduct.  Five of them were not named in the original indictment.  As I have stated before, anyone who seeks to live in the past and to return soccer to its old ways is on the wrong side of progress, and does a disservice to the integrity of this beautiful sport.  The Department of Justice is committed to ending the rampant corruption we have described amidst the leadership of international soccer – not only because of the scale of the schemes alleged earlier and today, or the brazenness and breadth of the operation required to sustain such corruption, but also because of the affront to international principles that this behavior represents.

    After all, global sports like soccer exemplify, in FIFA’s own words, “unifying, educational, cultural and humanitarian values.”  They are one of the primary ways we teach our children about character, about fair play and about teamwork.  International tournaments promote understanding between nations, and embody an acknowledgement of our common humanity – something that is desperately important, particularly in these times of global challenge.  That’s why this investigation does more than address corruption in a worldwide sports organization.  It also reaffirms the ideals that have always guided our society – and, most importantly, our young people – toward the fair and just future they deserve.  This Department of Justice intends to uphold those values – throughout this ongoing investigation, and always.

    I want to thank our international partners – particularly the Swiss authorities – for the close cooperation and invaluable assistance they continue to provide.  They have been instrumental in bringing these wrongdoers to justice and helping to restore the integrity of a vital athletic tradition.  Today’s action also relied on the tireless work of federal investigators and prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, in the FBI’s New York Field Office and in the Los Angeles Field Office of the IRS’s Criminal Investigation Division.  I am so grateful to all of the agents, analysts and attorneys who continue to devote their time and their talents to this important investigation.

    At this time, I’d like to introduce U.S. Attorney Capers, who has done an outstanding job leading this effort since his appointment in October, and who will provide additional details on today’s announcement.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Keynote Address on Counterterrorism and International Cooperation

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Thank you, Dr. [Robin] Niblett, for that kind introduction; for your leadership here at the Royal Institute of International Affairs; and for your lifetime of dedicated work in the service of international cooperation and global security.  I also want to thank Prime Minister [David] Cameron and the members of Her Majesty’s government for their hospitality during my visit to the United Kingdom.  And I’d like to thank this group of distinguished colleagues, inspiring leaders and devoted public servants for participating in this important conversation.  It’s a privilege to join you here today as we honor the unique bond between our nations; as we reaffirm the cherished values and ideals that we share; and as we rededicate ourselves to building the stronger, safer, and more united world for which we have fought together in the past, and toward which we continue to strive today.

    The United Kingdom and the United States have long been close partners and staunch allies and the connection between us – which Winston Churchill referred to as our “special relationship” – is one with deep roots and a rich history.  Almost all of America’s founders proudly considered themselves Englishmen and many were hesitant to shed that honorable title, even after the start of the American Revolution.  And the revolution itself – though it pitted us against one another in armed conflict – was inspired by the ideals of the British Enlightenment: responsive government, robust rights and liberties, and the fundamental equality of all people.      

    Those ideals have been a source of mutual understanding and shared strength ever since – and while they have been threatened by injustice within our nations and hostility from beyond our shores, they have continued not only to endure, but to expand.  Through the courageous struggles of prominent leaders and humble citizens; of freed slaves and former colonial subjects; of suffragists, ethnic minorities, religious dissenters and gay and lesbian advocates – we have extended the rights of liberty, equality and justice.  Through the tremendous courage and sacrifice of our countrymen –in two World Wars, in battlefields of Korea and today in the skies over Syria and Iraq– we have defended our beliefs against tyranny and oppression.  And together, we have come to the aid of others inspired by the principles that we share.

    Today, the values that have guided and defined us for centuries are facing a persistent threat: the rise of global terrorism and extremism – a scourge that has inflicted its pain on both of our nations in the recent past.  Ten years ago, this great city endured devastating attacks on its public transportation system, and you suffered another attack in the Underground only this week.  In the United States, as you know, we have also suffered terrorist attacks and we are currently investigating last week’s tragic shootings in California as an act of terror.  And as recent events in Paris, Beirut, and Mali remind us, we are far from alone in being targeted by these agents of violence.  These attacks are carried out with a single, repugnant purpose: to harm, frighten and intimidate anyone who believes in open and tolerant societies; in free and democratic governments; and in the right of every human being to live in peace, security and freedom.  As two nations who serve as beacons of those ideals to people around the world, we have a special responsibility to take on this terrorist threat, and to prevent it from causing the destruction it is so desperate to inflict.

    As Attorney General of the United States, my highest priorities are the security of our country and the safety of the American people.  At the Department of Justice, we are working tirelessly to uncover and disrupt plots that take aim not only at the United States, but at nations around the world.  We are acting aggressively to defuse threats as they emerge.  And we are vigorously investigating and prosecuting individuals who seek to harm innocent people.  To stop plots before they can be brought to fruition, we are going after individuals engaged in preparatory activities like fundraising, recruitment, planning and training.  Our approach has yielded important results: since 2013, we have charged more than 70 individuals for conduct related to foreign terrorist fighter interests and homegrown violent extremism and we continue to take action designed to monitor and thwart potential extremist activity. 

    But no nation can fight terrorism alone.  As our world continues to grow more interconnected and interdependent, cooperation and joint action are more essential than ever to combating cross-border threats like terrorism, cybercrime, corruption and human trafficking.  And while modern technology has helped to widen the circle of opportunity for so many citizens around the globe, it has also provided new channels that criminals can exploit for their own ends.  Online, violent ideologies can rapidly proliferate and spread and threats can leap borders and oceans in an instant.  No nation can exist in a bubble of isolation; no country can imagine themselves immune from world events; and the security of each state increasingly depends on the security of all states.  The words of four centuries past ring ever true today, “no man is an island entire of itself.”  In this environment, our strategic understanding and our common humanity demand that we supplement nationwide vigilance with international cooperation.

    That is why the United States is working with organizations like INTERPOL and EUROPOL to share information on foreign fighters.  It’s why we have provided resources, including FBI agents, to support INTERPOL’s Fusion Cell, which investigates the training, financing, methods and motives of terrorist groups around the world.  And it is why we have crafted information-sharing agreements with more than 45 international partners to identify and track suspected terrorists – a partnership that has now provided INTERPOL with approximately 4,000 profiles on foreign terrorist fighters.  From efforts to degrade terrorist capabilities, to building cooperative networks that help to preserve and share information and evidence after an attack, we are demonstrating our deep commitment to collaboration worldwide. 

    Let me give one example of how critical it is that we work together.  Terrorists, like other criminals, count on the difficulties that law enforcement agencies have in sharing information across borders – difficulties that are magnified now that electronic information may be stored in many different countries and may quickly disappear.  But starting some years ago, criminal justice experts from the U.S., the UK, France and the other G7 countries created the 24/7 cyber network – a rapid reaction system that now links approximately 70 countries.  Thanks to that system, after the recent horrific attacks in Paris, French investigators were able to work immediately with the U.S. Department of Justice and with U.S. Internet Service Providers, to preserve data from social media accounts and webpages identified as connected to the attacks, and to seek emergency disclosures to protect lives.  It is this kind of innovative thinking about international information sharing that we need to increase.

    Of course, it is also important to emphasize that our efforts to fight terrorism must always be compatible with safeguarding privacy and civil liberties – exactly as the 24/7 cyber system is designed to be.  Often, in conversations like this one, there is an implicit assumption that our safety must be balanced against our rights and our values; that there is a necessary trade-off between the hopeful optimism of our ideals and the cold reality of our national security.  But the view that we must abdicate our values to maintain our security presents a false choice.  Rather, our security exists to protect our values, because they are the wellspring of all that we are.  Progress within our nations has always been driven by our desire to live up to our ideals – of inclusiveness and opportunity, of equal rights and equal justice – and if we curb those rights in a misguided bid for short-term security, we betray not only our ancestors; not only ourselves; and not only our children – but all those for whom the United States and the United Kingdom represent the possibility of a better, freer future.

    In this regard, I am proud to say that the Obama Administration, with the support of Congress, has made the protection of civil liberties and privacy a priority in the fight against terrorism.  The record is a remarkable one: President Obama has created unprecedented transparency regarding our guidelines for collection and use of signals intelligence, including signals intelligence collected in bulk.  The President nominated and the senate has confirmed, an independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, as envisioned by Congress.  And just last week, independent public advocates were appointed to advise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as called for by the USA Freedom Act.  

    Moreover, in all of these efforts, as President Obama has made clear, our goal is to extend privacy protections not only to U.S. citizens, but to foreign nationals as well.  That is why, after years of negotiation, I am very happy to say that we were able to initial in September the U.S./EU “Umbrella” Data Privacy and Protection Agreement regarding law enforcement information.  And it is why – in a truly unprecedented step – the Administration has supported legislation to extend judicial redress rights to foreign nationals for privacy breaches regarding law enforcement information – legislation that, thanks to strong Congressional support, already has passed our House of Representatives, and is now pending in the Senate.  

    These actions are not only unprecedented, but reflective of the United States’ deep commitment to the principles they protect, as well as the importance of our relationship with our European partners in this struggle.  That is why it is particularly disappointing that the European Court of Justice – in a case based on inaccurate and outdated media reports – recently struck down the Safe Harbor Agreement in the Schrems decision.  And it is highly concerning to us that data privacy legislation advancing in the European Parliament might further restrict transatlantic information sharing – a step that not only ignores the critical need for that information sharing to fight terrorism and transnational crime, but also overlooks the enormous steps forward that the Obama Administration and Congress have taken to protect privacy.  It is important that all of us – on both sides of the Atlantic – work to set the record straight regarding our commitment to protect not only the safety of our citizens, but also their civil liberties and privacy.

    But one thing I am confident of in our work on these issues and in the larger fight against terrorism – we will not lose ourselves to fear.  We will respond to this and other threats the way we know best – by reaffirming the very ideals that distinguish us from those who wish us harm: freedom of speech; religious tolerance; the open exchange of ideas; and government that represents the will of its people.  These are the principles of Runnymede and Philadelphia, of the Glorious Revolution and the American Revolution – the principles that we have risen to defend time and again and emerged victorious.  For centuries, these ideals have inspired countless men and women around the world to seek the better life that is the promise of humanity and to demand that the elemental dignity of all mankind be recognized and respected.  And we must keep their promise alive.  

    There is no doubt that we come together at a time of uncertainty, facing dangerous threats and determined adversaries.  But in this moment of global challenge, we remain dedicated to the task that remains before us and to the work that so many have given their last full measure of devotion to fulfill.  Our nations may have been bloodied, but we will remain unbowed – in defense of our citizens, in solidarity with our allies and in allegiance to the values that make us who we are. 

    The road ahead will not always be easy.  We will encounter more times of uncertainty and setbacks.  But as we move forward in the work that will secure our homelands and prove our principles once more, we are fortified with the strength of our time-tested traditions, by the partnership of our longstanding allies and by the legacies of the brave men and women who fought to make our nations everything they are today.  I am confident about the road ahead.  I know that our promise will endure.  And if we can lean on our faith in our enduring values – and hold fast to our unshakeable belief in the cause of justice and the rule of law – then I have no doubt that out of a long and difficult night of challenge, a brighter day will come.

    Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at Second Chance Act – Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program National Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Thank you, Karol [Mason], for that kind introduction and for your outstanding leadership as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs.  I also want to thank Valerie Jarrett for her tireless work on so many important issues relating to criminal justice reform.  It’s a pleasure to be here today and it’s a privilege to join such a distinguished group of inspiring leaders, passionate advocates and eminent experts for this important convening about how we can continue working together to reduce recidivism, improve reentry outcomes and help every American exiting prison and jail lead a meaningful and productive life.

    This conversation is taking place at a particularly significant time.  Over the last few years, we have gained a deeper understanding of how a variety of factors can undermine basic equality and distort the arc of justice.  As a result, Americans from a range of backgrounds and beliefs have come to agree that our criminal justice system can and must be made more efficient, more effective and more fair.  And thanks in no small part to the efforts of people like you, we have arrived at a critical moment of consensus around the urgency of ensuring that each component of our justice system – from bail to fines and fees; from policing to indigent defense; and from sentencing guidelines to incarceration – is more closely aligned with our fundamental belief in opportunity and justice for all.

    A vital part of that task is examining what happens to our fellow Americans when they exit the justice system.  With our criminal justice system impacting one in four Americans in some way, the sheer human capital represented by that number is too important to our future to be written off and thrown away.   Their families cannot afford to lose their influence.  Their communities cannot afford to lose their contributions.  And we cannot afford to lose their potential.  But what happens when our fellow Americans finish paying their debt to society and return home, pockets empty?  Do they have opportunities to further their education?  Can they find jobs that allow them to grow and succeed?  Can they access mentoring programs and counseling services?  Do they have what they need to stay on the right path?  Do they have, in fact, a second chance?  These are crucial questions with profound implications, not only for the individuals returning to society, but for every American in every community.  If we let the cycle of incarceration and recidivism continue, too many Americans will be denied the chance to fulfill their potential and contribute their skills and talents to their communities.  If we allow those who have done their time to be further punished upon release by collateral consequences brought on by prejudice and neglect, too many of our neighborhoods will continue to struggle under the burden of division and mistrust.  And if we don’t prepare incarcerated individuals to re-enter society, public safety is harmed; taxpayer dollars are wasted; and we as a country will fall short of our promise. 

    That’s why the work you do is so important.  Whether you conduct job training for individuals looking for their next step, or counsel those grappling with addiction or mental illness, you make it clear to reentering Americans that they are not alone.  You walk alongside them as they navigate the difficult path forward.  And you give them the tools and help them hone the skills they need to make the most of their second chance.  Your work is having a broader impact, too – because of your successes, a growing number of states and municipalities throughout the U.S. are implementing evidence-based programs to help reduce recidivism; improve the prospects of the formerly incarcerated; and create stronger, safer, and more prosperous communities for all. 

    The Department of Justice is committed to doing our part to advance that mission.  Since Congress passed the Second Chance Act in 2007, our Office of Justice Programs has made nearly 750 Second Chance Act grants totaling more than $400 million – including $53 million in FY 2015 to 45 jurisdictions.  With the help of these funds, our grantees have offered critical assistance to populations at moderate and high risk of recidivism.  They have introduced comprehensive reentry programs for justice-involved youth; helped people with diagnosed mental illnesses find stable housing and avoid rearrest; offered college credit to incarcerated individuals; and established a variety of metrics for tracking progress so that we know what works.  These are just a few examples of the initiatives that you and your partners have launched in 49 states with SCA funding and we at the Justice Department could not be more proud to support your work.

    In addition to our partnerships with you, we are working with a number of cabinet-level agencies through the Federal Interagency Reentry Council.  This unique body, which I am proud to chair, is designed to reduce federal barriers to reentry and promote innovative approaches to reintegration.  For instance, under the council’s auspices, we’ve launched a pilot program with the Department of Education that makes some inmates eligible for federal Pell grants, opening doors through postsecondary education or training.  We’ve joined the Department of Housing and Urban Development to explore ways to address homelessness among the justice-involved publication.  And in the coming weeks, the Departments of Justice and Labor will establish a National Clean Slate Clearinghouse to provide local jurisdictions technical assistance with record-cleaning and expungement – an appropriate follow-up to President Obama’s recent announcement that federal employers would “ban the box” and no longer ask applicants about their criminal histories at the initial hiring stage. 

    The scope and pace of these efforts is a reminder of the real and remarkable progress that the United States has made in helping incarcerated citizens succeed after prison.  But though we have made an encouraging start, as you know, our work is far from finished.  At this critical juncture – this moment of rare bipartisan agreement – it is more important than ever that we harness this momentum and continue to push forward, so that every American returning from prison can find dignified work and adequate shelter; so that they can receive fair treatment and full opportunity; so that they return to a society that values them as fellow citizens; so that they can, in fact, truly return home.

    I have no illusions that the road ahead will be easy.  But with the help of extraordinary partners like all of you here today, I am not only hopeful, but confident, about where our nation is headed.  After all, you were calling for change long before criminal justice reform led the news broadcasts and earned headlines.  Now that change is within sight, I know that your conviction has only deepened, your resolve has only strengthened, and that our fight for progress will continue to bear fruit.  Thank you once again for all that you’ve done.  Thank you for your faith in our mission and our work.  I look forward to all that we will achieve together in the days and months to come. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General John P. Carlin Delivers Remarks at Practising Law Institute’s Coping with U.S. Export Controls and Sanctions 2015 Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you for that introduction, and for the opportunity to be a part of this important discussion. 

    As you all know, foreign governments and other non-state adversaries of the United States are engaged in an aggressive campaign to evade U.S. sanctions regimes and acquire sensitive U.S. technology.  In so doing, they threaten our economy, our prosperity and, most importantly, our national security.  Disrupting these national security threats is among the highest priorities of the Department of Justice, and the National Security Division. 

    But the responsibility of protecting our nation from these threats is a shared one.  Your clients – the companies you represent – and thus, you, have a critical role to play. 

    Because our companies have our nation’s crown jewels in their possession.  They house information targeted by thieves ranging from foreign powers bent on economic and military superiority, to individual criminals who know the market demand for this information, to terrorists who wish to create weapons of mass destruction. 

    Of course, companies have a responsibility to comply with the export control and sanctions regime.  We must also recognize that our companies are not immune from becoming unwitting victims of thieves and spies.  We live in an age where the threats we face are not limited to unlawful shipments and deliveries of goods.  Threats are also posed by insiders and through cyberspace.  Therefore, to protect what we value, our national assets, companies must learn how to comply with the law and how to protect themselves. 

    That is why it is good to see such a strong turnout.  Lawyers are on the front line helping clients adapt to an ever evolving export control regime.  Lawyers shape strategy – hardening collective defenses and counseling companies on best practices. 

    For example, sitting here today, you know to help your clients comply with export controls and sanctions.   Regimes designed to keep export controlled data and trade secrets out of the hands of rogue nations or terrorists.

    But have you had the chance to counsel those same clients when a cyber-hacker exfiltrated that information?  If you have not, unfortunately, it may only be a matter of time.  Cases involving the theft of export-controlled information via hacking are no longer uncommon. 

    Recently, we’ve brought cases where hackers targeted cleared U.S. defense contractors and stole massive amounts of sensitive data related to military technology, including export-controlled software.  These cases are not the first of their kind, and they will almost certainly not be the last.

    You have the power to help your clients protect themselves.  In a modern, interconnected world, there is quickly emerging a blending of practice areas.  Trade controls blends with data privacy, and export controls and sanctions trigger questions not only of compliance but of cybersecurity. 

    It is a fascinating time to be a practicing lawyer in this area, but one that brings with it grave responsibility. 

    Today, we’ll talk about a broad range of issues that go into being a modern export control practitioner. 

    National Security Division

    But first, I can explain a bit about the National Security Division of the Department of Justice. 

    The National Security Division was created in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, in part in response to a specific recommendation from the WMD Commission.

    The Commission identified intelligence failures that contributed to the attacks.  It highlighted the danger of the so-called wall between foreign intelligence and law enforcement.  We needed to be able to connect the dots.  We needed to change.

    So in 2006, Congress created the National Security Division, creating the first new litigating division in the Department in almost half a century.  The National Security Division brings all of the department’s resources to bear.  We bring down the wall, uniting prosecutors and law enforcement officials with intelligence attorneys and the Intelligence Community.

    We are responsible for executing the highest priority of the Department of Justice – to protect this nation from the full range of national security threats we face.  We are proud to have this essential mission. 

    At the top of our priority list is protecting our nation from terrorist threats.  In recent days, you’ve heard everyone from the president to the attorney general and the director of the FBI speaking at length about the steps we are taking to combat that threat each and every day.

    Just yesterday, we arrested Jalil Ibn Ameer Aziz, 19, a U.S. citizen and resident of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on charges of conspiring to provide, and attempting to provide, material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).  Aziz is alleged to have served as an intermediary between ISIL supporters.  Passing location information, including maps and a phone number, to assist persons seeking to travel and travel to and wage jihad with ISIL.

    Although it may not seem so at first, fighting terrorism and preventing the illegal export of U.S. technology are interrelated goals.  Take the case of Feras Diri.  Diri is indicted in the very same district as Aziz.  We allege he was involved in a scheme to illegally export U.S. goods to Syria in violation of U.S. sanctions.  Some of these good were dual-use items.  It doesn’t take much to imagine the consequences of those items falling into the wrong hands once it reaches Syria. 

    One of the most significant national security threats we face, is the protection of our nation’s assets – including export controlled information, as well as other sensitive information that may be targeted by nation states and terrorists.  In so doing, we take an intelligence-driven, threat-based approach.

    We have an entire section devoted to this work – the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, or simply CES.  We changed the name as part of a restructure to reflect the significance of export control and sanctions enforcement.  This year, CES also finalized a new Strategic Plan, setting forth an aggressive, comprehensive approach.  We know from experience that those seeking to do us harm will look for any available vulnerability to exploit.  They use all tools against us; it is our responsibility to do the same.  Our strategy is driven by the intelligence picture we see, which helps us prioritize and focus on the areas of most significant threat.

    Our Priorities and Our Regime

    Two of our highest priority areas involve China and WMDs.  Both are subject to export controls and regulations.

    Our economy profits from exports, and we support the flow of goods across borders.  But we must balance economic gain with the real threat to national security posed by certain technologies falling into the wrong hands. 

    That is why our export control regime is so important.  It is the best way to keep sensitive military and dual-use technologies, or even information that could be used in weapons of mass destruction, from ending up in the hands of terrorists and other adversaries.  They protect our innovation from being turned against us.

    With an ever-growing and evolving set of threats targeting our sensitive technologies and information, we must be vigilant. We must look at how transactions could make us more vulnerable, and do everything in our power to mitigate those vulnerabilities.

    Take China – despite a long-standing U.S. arms embargo, China continues to surge efforts to acquire advanced U.S. military technology.   China seeks U.S. persons with expertise to illegally provide services and know-how related to sensitive, export-controlled U.S. technology for military gain.  As an example, they targeted U.S. experts on jet engines to assist in developing Chinese-made engines.  If successful, our military edge over China is reduced; our country is put at greater risk.  Knowing what China seeks and why is essential to any sound export compliance and training program. 

    Iranian Sanctions

    Likewise, a high priority remains Iran.

    Earlier this year, the United States, Iran, the E.U. and five other nations reached a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). 

    The sanctions relief specified in the JCPOA does not go into effect until Implementation Day – which does not occur until after Iran has completed all necessary nuclear steps, as verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Even after Implementation Day, sanctions relief will not affect most laws and regulations enforced by the Department of Justice. 

    With few exceptions, U.S. or foreign persons involved in the export or re-export of U.S. goods or services to Iran remain subject to prosecution under the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, as do U.S. persons involved in Iranian transactions.

    The only sanctions relief relates to:

    • the export, re-export, sale, lease or transfer to Iran of commercial passenger aircraft, parts and services for civil end-uses;
    • the import of Iranian-origin carpets and foodstuffs; and
    • certain transactions involving Iran by foreign entities owned or controlled by a U.S. person.

    Looking beyond the sanctions to other U.S. export regulations, the JCPOA will have no effect on the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Export Administration Regulations (EAR).  Likewise, our commitment to prosecuting cases where defense articles on the U.S. Munitions List (USML), defense services and items subject to the EAR are exported to Iran remains as strong as ever.

    So as a practical matter, what does this mean?  Bottom line, companies and individuals, whether U.S. or foreign, need to remain vigilant when it comes to any possible commercial or financial interactions with Iran.  We will continue to investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute U.S. export control and sanctions cases involving Iran under our domestic authorities.  Because anything else is simply unacceptable. 

    The export control and sanctions regime in place exists to protect this nation from the proliferation threat.  From sensitive information and technology that could pose a grave danger in the wrong hands making its way to terrorists.  From our innovation being used to develop weapons of mass destruction or ballistic missiles. 

    Iran remains a designated state sponsor of terrorism, and we will not take our eye off of countering Iran’s efforts to support international terrorism and other destabilizing activities in the region.

    Corporate Misconduct

    U.S. companies – particularly in large international corporate structures, must understand this reality. 

    The risks – not only compliance-based risks, but security risks – must be front of mind, and we hope that as the lawyers who counsel, advise and represent these companies, you will talk frankly about them.  

    At the Department of Justice, we continue to prioritize corporate misconduct related to export control and sanctions violations.  The deputy attorney general issued guidance and directed changes to the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual to reflect the department’s sharpened focus in this area including on individual corporate defendants.

    To provide you clarity as you advise clients, we will provide guidance to make clear our current practices on voluntary self-disclosure of export and sanctions criminal violations.  We want to be transparent about our process and the factors we consider when assessing voluntary self-disclosures.  That way, the benefits for your clients are clear, and you can provide clear counsel.

    Because when a company voluntarily self-discloses export control and sanctions misconduct, fully cooperates and appropriately remediates, we will grant the company a significantly reduced penalty.  That can include a non-prosecution agreement (NPA), a reduced period of supervised compliance, a reduced fine and forfeiture and no requirement for a monitor. 

    If one or more aggravating factors are present to a substantial degree – like numerous willful shipments of defense articles to a foreign terrorist organization – a more stringent resolution might be necessary.  In all cases, however, the company that voluntary discloses will find itself in a better position one that does not.

    We are also discussing these issues with our regulatory partners to help you understand how the Department of Justice fits in to the broader regime.  The Department of Justice guidance we ultimately issue on VSDs will not supplant or supersede obligations to regulators.  Our ultimate goal is to be more transparent, so that companies will have more certainty about the benefits of self-disclosure are when dealing with prosecutors.  In the end, we think this is good for our national security mission and good for business.

    Voluntary self-disclosure is responsible.  But even if you choose not to pursue the route of voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation, your corporate clients need to remain vigilant or they may suffer serious consequences.

    Time and again, we have shown that willfully facilitating illegal transactions will not go unpunished. 

    Earlier this year, Schlumberger Oilfield Holdings Ltd. (SOHL), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Schlumberger Ltd., one of the largest oil and gas services companies in the world, pleaded guilty and agreed to pay a penalty of over $232 million for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by willfully facilitating illegal transactions and engaging in trade with Iran and Sudan.

    What it ultimately came down to, was that one subsidiary failed to adequately train its employees to ensure that all U.S. persons, including non-U.S. citizens who resided in the United States, complied with Schlumberger Ltd.’s sanctions policies and compliance procedures. 

    We will not hesitate to prosecute individuals and entities that facilitate illegal transactions in violation of U.S. sanctions.     

    Vigilance is essential.  Policies and procedures are simply not enough.  They must be fully executed and reinforced.  Simply “checking the box” by implementing an export control and sanctions compliance program without the proper support or follow through will not insulate a company from prosecution.

    Another point to keep in mind is the need to know your markets and your people.  When you’re part of a large corporate family with many segments located overseas, some subject to very different export control laws in foreign countries, you have be careful to ensure that conduct illegal in the U.S. does not become practice here.  If you have doubts, check with your regulator.  Something a foreign national employee does overseas may have been entirely legal there, but once transferred here, is a crime.

    When working with your clients on these and other difficult issues, implore them to be vigilant.  These are complicated areas, and it takes sound advice and a high level of scrutiny to ensure compliance.  

    Insider Threats

    Unfortunately, compliance is only one piece of the puzzle.  Because, in addition to the compliance risks that are common in global operations, your corporate clients – and, in fact, even potentially their outside counsel –also are vulnerable to the threats from insiders and hackers. 

    Insider threats – threats from trusted employees and contractors – is now a significant problem.  And they are threat to national security when they steal sensitive export-controlled technology.

    For instance, Mozaffar Khazaee stole materials from each of three defense contractors who employed him, including materials relating to the F35 Joint Strike Fighter.  He attempted to illegally export a shipping container’s worth of those proprietary, export-controlled materials to Iran in order to gain employment there.  After pleading guilty, he received 97 months in prison. 

    Although that sentence sends a strong message to any insider who would consider violating the trust of his or her employer, deterrence alone is not enough. 

    So what can you do to address this problem?  Report incidents of suspected insider theft as soon as they are detected.  Create detailed internal training and compliance programs designed to neutralize threats before they even occur, and provide evidence of willful or knowing conduct in the event an insider is not deterred. 

    Cyber-Enabled Export Violations

    That helps with threats from within our perimeters.  But unfortunately, we also face them from outside our borders.  That is why another of our export control enforcement priorities is to combat cyber exfiltration of sensitive U.S. technologies, including ITAR-controlled technical data.

    In the digital age, foreign nations and their agents can now steal information, including export-controlled technical data and technology, without setting foot on American soil.  Left unchecked, cyber espionage can erode our strategic advantages across commercial and military spectrums.

    When possible, we will use investigations, arrests and prosecutions, to disrupt efforts to steal from you and your clients.  We will also look to use all other legally available tools to deter, like sanctions, designations, diplomacy and other tactics. 

    But your partnership is critical.  You can harden your defenses, create resilient systems, evaluate your cyber hygiene and cooperate with law enforcement when your defenses simply aren’t enough.

    That is why we at the National Security Division and others throughout the U.S. government, including the FBI, have made cooperation with the private sector a key component of our export control strategy. 

    Outreach

    We work with U.S. companies, across all industry sectors, to ensure that our national security interests are protected.  We have spent time and energy in face-to-face sit downs so that we may better understand the concerns and challenges faced by U.S. companies, share guidance and information, and be there to help with protection, detection, attribution and response.  We can warn our companies that manufacture or sell targeted U.S. parts and technology when certain bad actors are seeking the particular parts and technology they make.

    Corporate outreach helps sensitize industry to the threat and thereby maximizes the prevention of export control and sanctions violations.  We believe that through such efforts we can help stem the flow of those sensitive goods out of the U.S. to malicious end-users that would use them to threaten our national security interests and the safety of our warfighters. 

    It’s likely that many of you here today have clients that we’ve already met with recently to discuss these types of issues.  If you do not, we would certainly welcome the opportunity to do so in the future.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, we recognize that our export control laws and sanctions regimes are complex and have a significant impact on the U.S. economy.  But they are there to protect against the many threats we face.

    And you play a critical role in that effort.  You and your clients can successfully negotiate the current export control and sanctions regimes and help keep America safe.

    Scrutinize closely each and every transaction undertaken with a foreign counterparty, whether a good or a financial transaction.

    Make sure that you understand the relevant compliance and sanctions regimes and how they apply.

    Make a voluntary self-disclosure to the National Security Division when you discover a willful violation of U.S. export control laws.

    Develop robust training and compliance programs.

    Focus not only on internal compliance, but on the threats posed by insiders and through cyberspace.

    Harden your cyber defenses.

    Develop a relationship with law enforcement, so that we may share valuable information with you to help you protect yourself, and be there to help you respond when your defense may simply not be enough.

    Profits may be the lifeblood of our corporations, but cutting corners here in the interest of the bottom line, is potentially catastrophic.  You and your clients risk enforcement actions, financial penalties and prison time.  But perhaps more significantly, doing so can provide a dangerous capability to an adversary who wishes to bring about damage, destruction or death to many.  So understanding and addressing how to comply with these regimes and neutralize these threats is not only the responsible thing to do, but the only thing to do. 

    The National Security Division will continue to approach export controls and sanctions with a broad and varied toolkit.  We will continue to vigorously pursue and prosecute those who violate our nation’s export control laws, but that is not how we define success.  Success is working with you to increase education and compliance and to prevent sensitive controlled technologies from falling into the wrong hands.  We will combat threats posed by insiders and through cyberspace.  And we will coordinate with our colleagues throughout the federal government to use an all tools approach – prosecution, listing, sanctions and other means of disruption – to combat national security threats.

    With the careful calibration of these tools and with an eye toward mitigating vulnerabilities and defending against threats, we can protect the national security while simultaneously fostering economic growth and job creation.

    Thank you for inviting me here this morning, and for your interest in these issues.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at the National Action Network’s Annual Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day Breakfast

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Reverend [Al] Sharpton, for that kind introduction and for your tireless efforts to shine a light in dark places and to draw attention to our nation’s unfulfilled promises.  For more than 20 years, the National Action Network has been part of the vanguard of this country’s ongoing movement for progressive change through expanded equality and opportunity.  Together, you have spoken out to ensure that our criminal justice system is fair and effective.  You have stood up for every eligible citizen’s right to vote.  And on issues as diverse as job access, corporate responsibility, education, and nonviolence, you have driven important conversations and prompted meaningful action to help create the more perfect Union to which we continue to aspire. 

    I want to thank my colleague, Acting Secretary [John] King of the Department of Education, for his service in that mission.  I also want to thank Jennifer Pinckney for being a part of this gathering and for her extraordinary example of charity and grace – not only in the last few months, but throughout her life.  And I want to acknowledge my predecessor at the Department of Justice – Attorney General Eric Holder, who richly deserves the honor you bestow on him today.  Attorney General Holder is a powerful advocate, a visionary leader and a devoted public servant who feels deeply the “fierce urgency of now” that fueled Dr. King’s extraordinary work.  I am proud to lead an institution that bears his indelible imprint and I am indebted to – and inspired by – his legacy there.  Finally, I want to thank all of you for being here today and for the work that you do every day across the country.  It is a pleasure – and a tremendous honor – to join you here this morning as we come together to celebrate the life and enduring legacy of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. – and to rally the next generation of leaders and advocates behind the cause of his life’s work: civil rights, social justice and opportunity for all.

    Every year, our nation pauses on this day to reflect on the immeasurable contributions and extraordinary sacrifices of a transformational leader.  From a remarkably early age, Dr. King was an unwavering champion of liberty and opportunity and a tireless proponent of unity and progress.  He spoke out for those who were silenced.  He stood up for those who were oppressed.  Most importantly, he took action, over and over again, in the face of clear threats and grave violence.  His words and deeds prodded the conscience of a nation that had long failed to deliver on the promises set forth in its founding documents.  And In the midst of what he had called a “long night of racial injustice,” he and countless other brave men, women, and children swept away Jim Crow, tore down barriers to the ballot box and enshrined new protections of freedom and dignity in our codes of law.  The victories of the Civil Rights Movement were extraordinary achievements and it is fitting that we celebrate them today.  But even more than celebrate, it is fitting that we act.  Dr. King knew that complacency and apathy were as dangerous to the mind as a billy club or fire hose to the body.  He knew that progress was not inevitable, but belonged instead to those willing to seize the moment, and that, as he stated so eloquently in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”   

    Dr. King’s words and deeds – and those of the millions who stood with him – are not vestiges of history, but timeless calls to action. 

    That call – that mission – has animated the Department of Justice since the inception of this Administration and it fuels our ongoing work to ensure that everyone in this country can achieve the full blessings of American life.  Our revitalized Civil Rights Division – the conscience of the department, led by the outstanding Vanita Gupta – is committed to ensuring that access to the ballot box is as fair and unencumbered as Dr. King dreamed it would be.  Wherever the franchise is being diminished – whether through historical barriers or newly erected ones – we stand prepared to use every tool at our disposal to protect the sacred American right to vote.  The Civil Rights Division is making significant progress bringing criminal civil rights cases, as well.  Over the course of this Administration, we have filed more criminal civil rights cases and prosecuted and convicted more defendants on hate crimes charges than at any other point in the Justice Department’s history.  And we’re working to protect civil rights within criminal justice, in part by strengthening relationships between law enforcement and the communities we serve and ensuring constitutional policing across the country.  We have launched a variety of new programs and innovative efforts at the local level – including my own six-city listening tour – to promote community policing and to build the relationships of trust that are so vital to effective law enforcement. 

    More broadly, we are working to ensure the fundamental fairness of the criminal justice system.  At the federal level, we are continuing to implement the “Smart on Crime” initiative – a bold reorientation of our prosecutorial approach that Attorney General Holder initiated in 2013.  In its first two years, Smart on Crime has not only been a bipartisan rallying point, but also a resounding success, with federal prosecutors using their resources conscientiously to bring the most serious wrongdoers to justice and with the overall crime rate declining in tandem with the overall incarceration rate for the first time in four decades.  But for fairness to be consistent and to have meaning, we have to look at every stage of the criminal justice process.  That is why we are working to end the school-to-prison pipeline to keep our children on the right path and out of the criminal justice system.  That is why we are investing in diversion and treatment programs that take an evidence-based approach to public health and criminal justice.  And that is why we are making sure that formerly incarcerated individuals have the tools and resources they need to successfully rejoin society and contribute to their communities.  We recently partnered with the Department of Education to extend Pell Grant support to some incarcerated individuals so that they can pursue an education that will not only reduce their likelihood of recidivism, but also throw open doors to opportunity.

    This is vital and in some cases life-changing work, but as you know all too well, we still have a long way to go.  Even today, with the progress we have made, we hear concerns so strikingly similar to the early days of the civil rights movement.  As I travel this great nation of ours I speak to people afraid to turn to law enforcement for help and thus stranded between fear and violence.  I hear from people who see the right to vote – the fundamental way in which we determine our destiny – becoming part of an elusive shell game and held just out of reach.  I hear from those who worry that a country founded on the freedom of all religions may devolve into one diminished by a fear of some religions.  And I hear the question – how far, in fact, have we actually come? 

    Yes, these are difficult times.  But my friends, these issues have always been hard.  We have always had to move forward, with no guarantees of success.  And we have always faced resistance.  That too, is the human condition.  But we have prevailed before and will prevail again.  And it is the challenge of every generation to learn this lesson and follow the path that keeps the dream alive.  

    That is why it is so fitting that on a day dedicated to justice, decency and equal opportunity, we are gathered by an organization called the National Action Network – because progress is never passive.  Progress does not simply arrive.  Instead, in this extraordinary nation created by and for the people, it is the product of a steady drumbeat of marching feet.  It is the result of a sustained campaign through hardship and oppression.  As President Obama said in his final State of the Union address last week, “Progress is not inevitable.  It is the result of choices we make together.”

    At a time when nothing about their success seemed foreordained, the foot soldiers of the Civil Rights Movement chose to keep going.  After each night in jail; after each thud of a billy club; after each cross burning and church bombing, Dr. King and his followers confronted their doubts and fears and chose to march on.  Rosa Parks chose to take her seat on a segregated bus.  John Lewis chose to take that first step onto the Edmund Pettus Bridge.  Time and time again, no matter how tired or bloodied they were, the men and women of the Civil Rights Movement summoned their courage, invoked their faith, and chose to take that next step, no matter what lay ahead.  

    And so, as we come together to celebrate the life of Dr. King, and as we seek to apply his lessons to the challenges we face today, here is the question facing all of us: what will we choose?  When we witness discrimination against others, what will we choose?  When we see the right to vote rolled back, what will we choose?  When we hear voices saying that we should be satisfied with the progress we have already made – that we have achieved enough – what will we choose?  Will we choose to remain silent?  Will we choose to stand aside and quietly acquiesce to the forces of apathy and inertia?  Or will we choose to remember that “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”?  Will we choose to keep this country marching towards freedom?  Will we choose to stand up and speak out against the voices of bigotry and prejudice?  Will we choose love over hate?

    I commit to you now that this Department of Justice will always choose to act.  We choose to act to ensure that the promise of America – the equality and opportunity of America – is within the grasp of all Americans.  We choose to act to lift up the essential humanity and equal rights of every American, regardless of what they look like, where they live, whom they love or the God they worship.  We choose to act – on behalf of those who have been left out and left behind. 

    This does not mean that the road ahead will be easy for any of us.  I wish that I could bring tolerance to every heart and humanity to every soul.  But while I cannot guarantee the absence of prejudice – I can guarantee the presence of justice.

    As I stand here in the company of so many determined advocates and foot soldiers of justice, I am optimistic about all that we will achieve, and I am excited about the road ahead that we will travel together.  Thank you for your dedication to this mission.  Thank you for your partnership in this cause.  And thank you for all that you have done, and all that you will continue to do, to make that dream – our dream; Dr. King’s dream – a reality for all. 

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Testifies Before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Good morning, Chairman Shelby, Vice Chairwoman Mikulski and distinguished members of the Subcommittee.  I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss steps the Department of Justice is taking to reduce gun violence and ensure smart and effective enforcement of our nation’s gun laws.

    As this Subcommittee well knows, our nation faces an epidemic of gun violence that has taken a devastating toll on communities throughout the country.  Each and every year, tens of thousands of Americans are injured or killed by firearms – in armed robberies, domestic disputes, suicides, accidents, shootouts and heinous acts of mass violence.  From law enforcement officers shot down while defending their communities, to children killed in tragic accidents, our friends and family members, neighbors and fellow citizens are being taken from us – day after day after day.

    As the list of tragedies involving firearms has grown, so has the American people’s belief that we must do more to stem the tide of gun violence – and this administration is committed to doing our part.  The executive actions that the President announced two weeks ago, including the measures I recommended to him, are essential components of our effort.  They are important steps that are within the Executive’s power to clarify existing legal provisions, focus enforcement efforts and spur innovation.

    I have complete confidence that the common sense steps announced by the President are lawful.  They are consistent with the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court and the laws passed by Congress.  For example, the Gun Control Act lists the people who are not allowed to have firearms – such as felons, domestic abusers and others.  Congress has also required that background checks be conducted as part of sales made by federally licensed firearms dealers to make sure guns stay out of the wrong hands.  The actions announced by the President, which focus on background checks and keeping guns out of the wrong hands, are fully consistent with the laws passed by Congress.

    Taken together, the new executive actions will bring progress on a number of fronts.  By clarifying what it means to be “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms, we raise awareness of and enhance compliance with laws that are already on the books.  By issuing new regulations, we ensure that licensed dealers who ship weapons will report them if they are lost or stolen in transit and that those trying to acquire some of the most dangerous weapons through trusts or corporations undergo background checks.  By enhancing our national system of background checks, we will be better prepared to keep guns out of the wrong hands in the first place.  By increasing access to mental health care treatment with a proposed $500 million investment to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), we will not only be helping those in need, but also curbing gun deaths – the majority of which result from suicide.  And by supporting research on gun safety technology, we will be laying the groundwork for a safer future and drawing on our strength as the most technologically advanced nation on Earth.

    The steps that I have outlined – and the actions that President Obama has described – are all well-reasoned measures, well within existing legal authorities, built on work that’s already underway.  They clarify laws that are already on the books – because clear notice will help ensure that those laws are followed.  They direct important resources to our law enforcement agents – because these men and women deserve to have the support they need to do their difficult jobs effectively.  They lay the groundwork for state governments to more easily provide information to our background check system and for helping people with mental illnesses gain access to care – because in addition to helping people get the treatment they need, we must make sure we keep guns out of the hands of those who are prohibited by law from having them.  And they invest in research and promising technology that will make weapons safer – because problem-solving through innovation has always been one of our country’s greatest strengths.

    I am confident that these actions will help to make our people safer, our communities more secure and our law enforcement more effective.  But I also have no illusions that these measures by themselves will end gun violence in America.  At a time when there is so much work to be done and so much capacity for progress, there are many areas where only Congress can act.  We would welcome the opportunity to work with you to further these goals.  That’s why I am so grateful to have this opportunity to speak with you today about how we can work together to reduce gun violence in this country.  And I look forward to continuing this conversation in the days ahead as we discuss how to keep our promise to protect and defend every American’s right to safety and security and to life and liberty.

    At this time, I’d be glad to answer any questions you may have.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell Delivers Remarks at the 12th Annual State of the Net Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Good morning. The Attorney General apologizes for not being able to be here today.  She was at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland – addressing cybercrime issues – and, unfortunately, unable to get back to D.C. in time for this because of the snowstorm.

    Thank you, Tim [Lordan], for that warm welcome, and for your leadership of the Internet Education Foundation (IEF).  I also want to thank the IEF for the invaluable services you have provided since your organization was founded nearly two decades ago – and that you continue to provide today.  Through this conference series, you bring together industry leaders, dedicated experts and devoted public servants to explore how we can harness new technologies to build more empowered communities and a stronger nation.

    As the Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division, my foremost task in the cyber area is the vigorous, fair and effective enforcement of our cyber laws.  The Justice Department does that by finding ways to protect our networks against evolving threats, by thwarting bad actors online, and by ensuring that both our security and our liberties remain as strong in the digital age as they have been throughout our history. 

    Essentially, we are focused on a question that President Obama posed in his State of the Union address a few weeks ago: How do we make technology work for us, and not against us? 

    In our age of rapid change and constant disruption, that question is relevant to almost every aspect of our lives, including law enforcement and national security.

    There is no doubt that technology has both expanded and complicated our capacity to detect, investigate and prosecute crimes.  Today, by using new technologies, we can analyze some types of evidence with unprecedented speed and accuracy, and coordinate with partners around the world in real time. 

    But as law enforcers have become better equipped, so have the law breakers we’re working to disrupt.  Digital technology has transformed how police and prosecutors do our jobs, but it has also transformed how wrongdoers commit their crimes.  Our bank accounts and personal information now exist online, tempting thieves and fraudsters. 

    The greater anonymity of cyberspace gives cover to drug dealers and arms traffickers.  Dark websites are used to circulate illicit content, like images of child sexual exploitation and stolen credit cards. 

    Communication is frequently by instant message and email, so there are no actual paper trails, but rather virtual ones in data stored on digital devices, hard drives and in the cloud.  And it isn’t just criminals who exploit the Internet for nefarious purposes. 

    The web also hosts groups and individuals who seek to harm our core security interests – from state-sponsored hackers conducting economic espionage; to rogue militants and official cyber warfare units targeting our infrastructure; to terrorist groups plotting attacks, radicalizing recruits and spreading hateful ideologies.

    These emerging threats require nimble, innovative and adaptive responses, and at the Department of Justice, we are committed to doing our part to ensure that law enforcement stays a step ahead of bad actors. 

    The FBI continues to investigate cyber intrusions and national security threats while monitoring individuals, organized groups and state actors who might attempt to steal sensitive data or inflict harm.  We recently created a Cybersecurity Unit within our Criminal Division, staffed with experienced prosecutors fluent in the law, policy and practice of cybercrime prevention. 

    And the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has established an Internet Investigations Center (known as IIC) where federal agents, legal counsel and investigators track and counter illegal online firearms trafficking.  The IIC – which was highlighted in the president’s recent recommendations to curb gun violence – has already identified a number of significant traffickers operating over the Internet, and their work has led to prosecutions against individuals and groups using the “dark net” to traffic guns to criminals or attempting to buy firearms illegally online. 

    Of course, the Department of Justice’s work to combat cybercrime is enhanced through our collaboration with law enforcement partners in other agencies, such as the U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Postal Inspection Service.  And we are working to enhance cybersecurity and information sharing through our work with the Department of Homeland Security.

    These are important steps to protect our online information and to combat crime here at home – but with an entity as vast and complex as the Internet, we must also reach beyond our own borders to partner with other countries.  And that’s exactly what we’ve done. 

    In the last fiscal year, the FBI’s Cyber Division embedded three permanent Cyber Assistant Legal Attachés in the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia to help facilitate information-sharing, improve cooperation on investigations and build even stronger relationships with our allies. 

    We recently placed a Criminal Division prosecutor with Eurojust in The Hague and one in Southeast Asia.  These positions will help to facilitate information-sharing, improve cooperation on investigations and build even stronger relationships with our law enforcement partners in other countries.

    We’ve also created a cyber unit in our Office of International Affairs (OIA) dedicated to responding to and executing requests for electronic evidence from foreign authorities – requests that have increased by 1,000 percent over the last decade. 

    To help manage that significant growth, we have been actively hiring additional attorneys and professional staff for OIA’s Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty Modernization Project, and we hope to continue expanding our ability to help our overseas counterparts.  And we are providing critical, real-time assistance to foreign counterparts through the 24/7 Points of Contact Network established by the Group of Seven Nations and by the Budapest Cybercrime Convention – a convention that, I am pleased to note, continues to be joined by countries around the world committed to fighting cybercrime.

    Partnerships like these don’t just cultivate closer connections with our friends and allies – they also get results.  In 2012, we participated in a multinational sweep of child-pornography websites, ultimately dismantling more than 200 websites that sexually exploited children. 

    In November 2014, we joined more than 15 countries under the auspices of the European Cybercrime Centre – or EC3 – to launch Operation Onymous, which shuttered a number of so-called “dark market websites” peddling drugs, weapons, stolen credit card data, fake passports and computer-hacking tools. 

    And this past July, our joint effort with EC3 shut down the Darkode hacking forum – an underground site where hackers convened to buy, sell and trade malicious software, botnets, intrusion tools and stolen personal information.  That operation involved a coalition of 20 nations, led by the U.S. Department of Justice and EC3, and allowed us to charge, arrest or search 70 Darkode members and associates around the world. 

    The Justice Department will continue to work with foreign law enforcement agencies to prevent and prosecute groups and individuals that illegally use the Internet for crime and exploitation.  Of course, as we seek to ensure the safety and integrity of our devices, databases and networks, it is crucial that we work closely not only with other law enforcement officers, but also with the people who create and design these products themselves – the executives, entrepreneurs and engineers who make America’s tech sector the envy of the world. 

    Our collaboration has been instrumental in a range of important victories, including the takedown of the GameOver Zeus Botnet, an operation in which technology and data-security companies played an invaluable role.  We are committed to building on those successes by maintaining strong partnerships with the private sector. 

    That’s why the department has placed a high priority on entities like the FBI’s National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force, which enables collaboration across government to respond to computer intrusions and attacks, and the National Cyber-Forensics & Training Alliance, which brings together law enforcement, private partners and experts in academia to address the cyber threats we face together. 

    And it’s why the Attorney General and I have been meeting regularly with industry leaders to foster cooperation and discuss urgent issues – including last week at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, where the Attorney General joined with industry leaders to endorse five recommendations for enhancing public/private partnerships to fight cybercrime.  We will continue to reach out to representatives of the tech industry, and our door is always open to new ideas for combatting cybercrime and online extremism. 

    One area where cooperation between the government and the private sector is especially important is in addressing the growing problem of the government’s inability to obtain critical information in electronic form even when we have court authorization to do so.  This is the problem known as “going dark.” 

    While investigations used to rely on physical evidence – like handwritten notes, or documents stored in filing cabinets – as you can imagine, in the 21st century that kind of evidence is growing scarce.  Our ability to track and prosecute criminals now often depends on instant messages, emails and other forms of digital information.  In fact, nearly every criminal investigation we undertake at the federal level relies on electronic evidence. 

    But as new ways of using encryption become an increasingly standard feature of personal electronic devices and messaging platforms, companies are losing the ability to respond to lawful processes.  Those materials are increasingly inaccessible to law enforcement officers, even when we have a warrant to examine them.  And we find ourselves facing obstacles which can stop our investigations and prosecutions in their tracks.

    The security of our online information is critically important, and so is the legal process that protects our values and our safety.  These are complementary, not competing priorities.  After all, digital security is a vital tool, but it is not a cure-all – especially when it impedes our ability to protect ourselves and each other in the physical world. 

    The Department of Justice is completely committed to seeking and obtaining judicial authorization for electronic evidence collection in all appropriate circumstances.  But once that authorization is obtained, we need to be able to act on it if we are to keep our communities safe and our country secure. 

    From gang activity to child abductions to national security threats, the ability to access electronic evidence in a timely manner is often essential to successfully conducting lawful investigations and preventing harm to potential victims. 

    As FBI Director [James] Comey recently said, in May, two terrorists attempted to kill a lot of people.  One of the terrorists exchanged 109 messages with an overseas terrorist.  We have no idea what he said because it was encrypted.  That is a big problem.  We have to grapple with it.

    That’s why the Justice Department and organizations like the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National District Attorneys Association and the Major Cities Chiefs Association feel strongly that there needs to be a way for law enforcement to retrieve critical information in cases where it’s necessary and authorized.  We are committed to working with innovators, leaders and problem-solvers like you to figure out how we can best meet this public need together.

    Of course, our interest in working together with you extends beyond this particular issue.  The Internet has so fundamentally changed the way we live our lives that there are times when institutions like law enforcement must evolve.  And as we seek to adapt to this new reality in a wide variety of ways, your creativity, your expertise and your leadership can help us ensure that the innovations we enjoy will benefit and protect the American people – and not those who would harm them or their liberties and rights.

    We understand that this is no easy task.  These are novel and difficult challenges.  But what makes us confident about our ability to succeed is that, throughout our history, this country has always found a way to move forward while retaining the values that make us who we are.  We are certain that we will do the same in the digital age.  And together, we will build a brighter, safer and more prosperous future for all.

    Thank you for your ongoing cooperation in that effort, and for your commitment to our shared goals.  I look forward to all that we will accomplish – together – in the weeks and months ahead.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at the American Correctional Association Winter Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Good afternoon and thank you for that warm welcome.  I want to thank Governor [John Bel] Edwards for that very kind introduction; for his lifelong commitment to law enforcement; and for his thoughtful leadership in promoting evidence-based, proven strategies for strengthening the work that we are here to discuss.  I also want to thank Executive Director [Jim] Gondles for inviting me to address you and for his decades of outstanding work in law enforcement and corrections. Thanks to all of the distinguished experts and passionate advocates who are here with us today.  And I want to take a moment to thank our extraordinary correctional staff and to recognize the outstanding and challenging work that they perform every day.  Your efforts may not often make headlines and they rarely receive the praise they deserve.  But I know, as you do, that your work as law enforcement officers – and you are law enforcement officers in the clearest sense – is profoundly important, deeply necessary and essential to fulfilling the Justice Department’s sacred mission.  You defend the American people and protect our values; you build safer communities and reduce crime and exploitation.  I am proud to serve alongside you in that effort. 

    It’s a pleasure to join you all here in New Orleans as we explore new ways to protect public safety and promote justice throughout the United States.  That effort is an essential part of this country’s founding mission to provide liberty, justice and equality for all – and for more than 140 years, the American Correctional Association (ACA) has been devoted to holding our correctional institutions to those ideals.  By maintaining the highest ethical standards among correctional workers and administrators at all levels, you ensure that incarcerated people are treated fairly, with decency and with respect for their humanity.  By advancing research, you help the public and policymakers understand where our system falls short and how it can be made stronger.  And by promoting rehabilitation and reentry, you stand for the principle that those who have done their time deserve a meaningful second chance at a better life; that all of us are more than the worst thing we have ever done.  As your founders wrote a century and a half ago in the ACA’s Declaration of Principles: “The state has not discharged its whole duty to the criminal when it has punished him, nor even when it has reformed him.  Having raised him up, it has further duty to aid in holding him up.”  You have always been at the forefront of corrections policy in the United States and as a result of your efforts, our society is fairer, safer and stronger today.

    It is essential that we recognize and celebrate the progress made by organizations like the ACA – but we must also leverage that progress to propel us forward.  The criminal justice system as a whole still faces real and important challenges.  A cycle of poverty and incarceration cuts through too many of our communities.  Harsh mandatory sentences continue to strain our prisons and jails with too many individuals who have committed nonviolent, low-level drug crimes, making it difficult to allocate scarce resources effectively.  Funding for rehabilitation is hard to come by, denying too many inmates the programs and skills they need to successfully return home.  And even those who do receive training are released into a society filled with unnecessary roadblocks to getting a job and finding a place to live – a counterproductive system that makes it easier for them to slip back into the patterns that landed them in jail in the first place. 

    Addressing these issues is central to the mission of the ACA.  It is also central to the work of the Justice Department and the Obama Administration.  In 2013, my predecessor, Attorney General Eric Holder, launched the Smart on Crime initiative – a landmark effort to make federal law enforcement more efficient, more effective and more fair.  We shifted our approach away from harsh mandatory sentences for low-level drug offenses, which enabled us to focus on more dangerous defendants and more violent crimes.  We also placed an emphasis on rehabilitation and reentry programs that can reduce recidivism and promote public safety.  And I am pleased to say that, during the time that Smart on Crime has been in effect, we have seen a reduction in crowding, making our prisons safer while allowing for the delivery of reentry and rehabilitative programs that are so critical to changing lives. 

    Improving rehabilitation programs and smoothing reentry isn’t just good for inmates; it’s also good for correctional staff and for our communities as a whole.  More than 600,000 people are released from federal, state and local prisons every year.  These are 600,000 people who are someone’s father, someone’s mother; someone’s brother or sister and someone’s child.  Preparing them to find good housing, to be reliable employees, to contribute to their communities and to abide by the law is a critical component of our responsibilities and it has tremendous implications for the safety of our neighborhoods, the health of our economy and the strength of our nation.  If we can reduce recidivism by helping motivated individuals successfully reenter society, we can reduce crime across the country – and make our neighborhoods better places to live, work and raise our children. 

    At the Department of Justice, we are taking our efforts even further.  In the last fiscal year alone, our Office of Justice Programs (OJP) has disbursed $53 million in Second Chance Act grants to promising state and local reentry efforts, with a particular focus on populations at the greatest risk of recidivism, including justice-involved youth and people with mental illness.  Last year, the Department hired its first-ever Second Chance Fellow, Daryl Atkinson – a formerly incarcerated individual who went on to earn a law degree and who now advises the Justice Department on issues related to reentry.  And through the Federal Interagency Reentry Council, which I have the privilege of chairing, the department is working closely with a number of Cabinet-level agencies to promote innovative approaches to reintegration – from expanding Pell Grant eligibility with the Department of Education; to studying ways to reduce homelessness with the Department of Health and Human Services; to assisting municipalities with record-cleaning and expungement alongside the Department of Labor.

    Of course, we recognize that the work of helping incarcerated individuals succeed outside prison must begin inside prison.  That not only involves ensuring humane and safe conditions for inmates and staff – an area in which our Civil Rights Division has collaborated closely with correctional leaders around the country.  It also requires commitment to a correctional philosophy that promotes rehabilitation from day one.  For decades, the heart of that commitment has been Federal Prison Industries (FPI), which President Franklin Roosevelt established in 1934 to employ thousands of incarcerated people.  Today, FPI remains the Bureau of Prisons’ (BOP) largest and most successful reentry program, helping men and women find a new sense of purpose and develop concrete skills that they can bring back to their communities.  I am proud of the work that FPI is doing.  My dedication to its continued success is unwavering.  And I am pleased to welcome its new CEO, Gary Simpson – an expert in manufacturing operations with 28 years of experience.  Over the next few years, Gary will spearhead a business transformation plan to expand FPI’s activities – using a business model that results in no costs to the taxpayers – to ensure that more incarcerated individuals can take advantage of this vital program.  I am excited about where his work will take us.

    In addition to reinforcing tried-and-true programs like FPI, the Department of Justice is also forging new pathways to better reentry outcomes.  This administration took a major step when the Bureau of Prisons created the Reentry Services Division, which has expanded mental health resources, supported substance abuse treatment programs and improved work and educational opportunities that prepare inmates for success after release.  BOP also launched a comprehensive assessment of its educational offerings, identifying opportunities for improvement across its correctional institutions.  You will hear more about our innovative approach to prison education and adult literacy in the weeks to come.  But so far, BOP is more effectively serving inmates between the ages of 18 and 21 who require special learning accommodations and it has also inspired a specialized pilot curriculum for inmates who need instruction at the Pre-K through fifth-grade levels.

    Beyond these advances, we are determined to reform areas of longstanding correctional policy that aren’t effective.  For decades, prison systems have sought to better manage their facilities by removing certain inmates from the general population – placing them in “restrictive housing” and solitary confinement.  While there are times when this practice is necessary for the protection of inmates, personnel, or the public, there is little doubt that has sometimes been used without due consideration and without good cause.  We also know that it is possible to reduce the use of restrictive housing while also enhancing staff safety – creating better conditions for inmates and for the brave and hardworking officers charged with their protection.  Since January 2012, the federal Bureau of Prisons – under the outstanding leadership of former Director Charles Samuels – has cut its restrictive housing population by 25 percent while achieving significant reductions in staff assaults at the same time.  This only serves to underscore that we can change our practices without compromising a bedrock principle of corrections: that the safety of our officers and our inmates comes first. 

    Last July, in order to examine our own practices further and identify areas for improvement, President Obama directed me to lead a review of restrictive housing across American prisons. I am pleased to say that we have completed our review and delivered our report to the President.  And the President has directed the department to implement our recommendations.

    In conducting this review, the Department of Justice drew on the extensive experience and collective wisdom of BOP under the leadership of former Director Charles Samuels, advocates and stakeholders who are invested in this issue and, of course, the ACA itself.  We developed a series of guiding principles that reflect our values and our goals.  For example, we believe that inmates should be housed in the least restrictive setting necessary to ensure their own safety, as well as the safety of staff, other inmates and the public.  Correctional systems should always be able to clearly articulate why an inmate is in restrictive housing and those reasons should be supported by objective evidence.  And restrictive housing should always serve a specific purpose – with a “step-down” program in place to ultimately return the inmate involved to less restrictive conditions. As you all know, one of the challenges in trying to improve restrictive housing practices is that it currently serves multiple purposes: it is used to address inmates who violate disciplinary rules; to protect inmates who face threats within the prison system; and to isolate inmates who can’t function safely in the general population.  And so, in order to make lasting reforms and ensure restrictive housing is used in accordance with these principles, we need a multi-pronged strategy.

    To that end, in addition to the guiding principles, the report identifies several specific steps that we must take: We must put reasonable limits on when, why and for how long an inmate can be placed in restrictive housing.  We must enhance our efforts to divert high-risk, high-needs inmates – such as those with serious mental illness, or verified security threats – to alternative forms of housing, where they can receive specialized services in less restrictive conditions.  We must conduct regular, multidisciplinary staff reviews of inmates’ placement in restrictive housing.  We must improve the conditions within restrictive housing to ensure that individuals have more time out of their cells and receive needed programming.  We must focus on reentry and make special efforts to ensure that inmates are not placed in restrictive housing during the final months of their prison terms.  And we must enhance protections for vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women; gay, lesbian and transgender inmates; and especially young people. 

    Among the actions I will direct BOP to take to meet these goals is an across-the-board reduction of maximum penalties for punitive segregation to curb excessive use of restrictive housing and solitary confinement as punishment – including a ban on restrictive housing as discipline for low-level offenses.  I will direct the Bureau to establish new protective custody units so that inmates who need protective custody won’t be unnecessarily placed in solitary confinement.  I will direct wardens to increase out-of-cell time in restrictive housing.  I will direct the Bureau to allocate $24 million in additional mental health services for federal restrictive housing inmates – a request that will be included in the President’s budget for Fiscal Year 2017.  And I am proud to say that, in line with this report’s recommendation, I will direct the Bureau of Prisons to terminate the practice of placing children and juveniles in restrictive housing.  In the interest of our children’s safety; in the interest of their development; and in the interest of ensuring their ability to succeed, we are ending this practice once and for all. 

    I am confident that these policies will help all of us move towards greater transparency, efficiency and effectiveness and they will serve as a valuable roadmap for future reforms in the federal system and in correctional facilities across the country.  I know that the ACA is preparing its own recommendations for reducing our reliance on restrictive housing – many of which are in line with our own guiding principles – and I want to applaud you for your leadership and your commitment to this vital issue.  I look forward to drawing on your wisdom and experience and collaborating with all of you as we move ahead together.

    At the federal level, we’re already addressing one of the main reasons we rely on restrictive housing: the unprecedented growth in the federal prison population over the last three decades.  The swelling number of inmates has maxed out our facilities, jeopardized our rehabilitation efforts and made it harder for correctional officers to safely and effectively do their jobs – which are already among the most difficult in law enforcement.  To address this problem, Congress established the bipartisan Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections – an independent working group that for the past year has studied overcrowding in federal prisons – and this week, I received the task force’s recommendations.  They describe a series of concrete steps that we can take in some of the areas we’ve discussed today.  They call for a reassessment of whom we incarcerate and for how long, so that we can be sure that we’re using our system wisely and effectively.  They advocate for a culture of safety and rehabilitation in our prisons, including through the use of risk-reduction programming.  They augment our reintegration practices by emphasizing supervision and support.  And they bolster transparency and accountability to ensure that these goals are being met.  The task force also requests federal funding to support these reforms and I urge Congress to take appropriate action.  I further call on Congress to pass the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, a bill that was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a strong bipartisan basis, as soon as possible. That bill would represent an important step forward on many of these critical issues – and will help us put federal prisons on a path that is more fair and more sustainable for inmates, correctional officers and taxpayers alike. 

    These are all important steps forward and I am personally committed to expanding on this work in the days and months ahead, while ensuring that we continue to protect our hardworking correctional workers from harm.  I am always mindful of the fact that, in performing your duties, you and your colleagues risk your personal safety – and even your lives – every day.  And while the Bureau of Prisons took some major steps to bolster protections over the past couple of years, we intend to continue exploring new technologies and new strategies to make your difficult jobs as safe as possible.

    It is encouraging that, as a result of the renewed attention these matters are receiving in research, advocacy and media coverage, a growing number of Americans have begun to join our shared call for progress in criminal justice.  Particularly in the last few years, thanks in no small part to the leadership and dedication of the people in this room, that chorus has expanded to encompass people from across the political spectrum and from all walks of life.  At this critical moment of rare bipartisan agreement, it is more important than ever that we harness this momentum and continue to push forward.  With the help of extraordinary partners like you and with the determination and fortitude that you have always shown, I believe that we will make the most of this unique moment of consensus.  I believe that we will give every American their chance to lead lives of meaning and purpose.  And I believe that when we are finished, we will have left our children a society that is safer, more prosperous and more just.

    Thank you for your enduring commitment to this important issue.  Thank you for all that you’ve done and continue to do on behalf of the safety and well-being of the American people.  And thank you for your steadfast partnership in holding this nation to its own timeless principles.  I look forward to all that we will accomplish – together – in the days ahead.  

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Bradenton Man Sentenced To More Than 15 Years For Production And Receipt Of Child Sexual Abuse Material

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Tampa, Florida – U.S. District Judge Mary S. Scriven has sentenced Buddy Allen Travis (42, Bradenton) to 15 years and 8 months in federal prison, followed by a lifetime of supervised release, for the production and receipt of child sexual abuse material. Travis pled guilty on October 1, 2024.

    According to court documents, Travis persuaded a 14-year-old minor victim to engage in sexual activity with him using Facebook. Travis engaged in sexual conversations with the minor victim and asked her to produce and send sexually explicit images of herself to him. Travis also sent obscene images of himself to the minor victim.

    This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Courtney Derry.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn Votes to Confirm Pam Bondi for Attorney General

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) released the following statement after Pam Bondi was confirmed as Attorney General of the United States:
    “The Biden-Harris administration weaponized the rule of law and allowed cartels and fentanyl to devastate our communities. Throughout her confirmation process, Pam Bondi has demonstrated a clear commitment to restoring trust and integrity in institutions like the Department of Justice and the FBI, and to ending the Biden-Harris administration’s failed border policies. I have full confidence she will do just that.”  

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Bill Baer Delivers Remarks at Second International Conference on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Jennifer [Smith of the International Legal Foundation] for your kind words. 

    I want to thank Minister of Justice [German] Garavano, Vice-Minister of Justice [Santiago] Otamendi and Chief Federal Public Defender General Stella Maris Martinez of the Government of the Republic of Argentina, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the United Nations Development Programme and the International Legal Foundation, for coordinating this important gathering so that we may, together, explore how to strengthen and improve access to criminal legal aid globally.

    And equally important, I want to thank all of you – the gathered Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Attorneys General, Supreme Court Justices and criminal legal aid providers and experts – for participating in this conference.  All of the leaders in this room – and so many others across the globe – are indispensable partners in our efforts to fulfill the promise of access to criminal legal aid.  Your work is moving us closer to the ideals of equality, opportunity and justice under law.

    The United States participated with enthusiasm at the historic first international convening on criminal legal aid, held in Johannesburg, and it is a privilege to join you in Buenos Aires at the second biannual conference.

    Today, with our Presidential election just concluded, I address you not only as an official of the United States Department of Justice, but also as a representative of American democracy.  Since George Washington first relinquished his office to incoming President John Adams in 1797, a peaceful transition of power has symbolized the stability of the United States government.  On January 20, for the 44th time, a President will transfer his authority and responsibilities to his democratically elected successor.  With that transition may come changes in policies and priorities.  That is normal and in the natural course.  But what will not change – what has not changed for over 200 years, from Administration to Administration – is the promise that all people – regardless of wealth or want, status or stature, color or creed – are entitled to a set of undeniable rights:  equal protection, fundamental fairness and impartial justice.

    This commitment to equal justice is rooted in the founding ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.   It has been enshrined by our Supreme Court in milestone decisions like Brown v. Board of Education, which struck down racial segregation in schools, and Gideon v. Wainwright, which guaranteed that a defendant in a criminal case has the right to a lawyer whether or not that person can afford one.  It has been embraced by Presidents of both parties, as exemplified by the creation of the Legal Services Corporation, the largest funder of civil legal aid for low-income Americans, by President Richard Nixon and President Bill Clinton’s signing of the landmark Violence Against Women Act, which provides legal aid for victims of domestic violence.  And it is embodied in the renewed debate on the criminal justice system, in which Americans from a range of backgrounds and political beliefs have come to agree on the need to address persistent inequities and inefficiencies in our criminal justice system, from the fairness of our sentencing laws, to the injustice in imposing fines and fees against those unable to pay, to how we reintegrate into civic and economic life those individuals convicted of crimes who have paid their debt to society.

    Our progress towards fulfilling these promises has not been uninterrupted.  At times, we have made great strides, dedicating resources, energy and ideas to the task.  At other times, we have fallen short of our own ideals.  But with each triumph and setback, we have been reminded that justice is as much a journey as it is a destination – as much a process as it is an outcome – and that the fairest criminal justice system gives equal attention to both.

    Addressing this challenge has been a priority of the Department of Justice in the eight years of the Obama Administration.  In 2010, the department launched the Office of Access to Justice – which I oversee and which seeks to improve access to legal aid to everyone in the United States who needs it.  Much of the Office’s work is directed at strengthening criminal defense for the poor by focusing on many of the same values outlined in the 2012 U.N. Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems.

    Among our most significant accomplishments has been to ensure the reality of Gideon’s promise, for the right to counsel is not only a constitutional imperative but vital to the effective functioning – and legitimacy – of the U.S. criminal justice system.  Fulfilling this promise is not easy.  Between 1999 and 2007, the number of public defenders – the front-line lawyers in our country who provide legal aid to indigent criminal defendants – increased by only four percent while their caseload increased by 20 percent.  When managing such huge caseloads, it is difficult and often times impossible, for public defenders to carry out their legal and ethical duties to their clients.  To help alleviate that problem, the Department of Justice has awarded millions of dollars to cities, states and defense advocacy organizations to support their indigent defense work.  These awards expanded the number of cities that participate in the department’s “Smart Defense” program, where cities use data, research and research partnerships to enhance criminal justice systems and programs.  These funds have also been invested in bringing risk assessment to the pre-trial detention stage, so that judges are making informed pre-trial release decisions that improve cost-effectiveness while protecting public safety and defendants’ due process, and to ensure that our public defenders have the skills necessary to be effective pretrial advocates.   And where states have proven unwilling to dedicate the necessary resources to public defender services, the department has filed amicus briefs in our courts arguing that it is a constructive denial of the constitutional right to counsel for a public defender system to be so under-resourced, so understaffed and so underfunded that an indigent defendant has access to counsel in name only. 
     
    The priority on access to criminal legal aid has extended to forging partnerships with American Indian tribes – our nation’s indigenous communities.  As Robert Kennedy rightly noted when he served as Attorney General, it is a tragic irony that the first Americans have endured a long and painful history of broken promises, deferred action and denied rights at the hands of the United States Government.  As one of many steps taken by the Justice Department to right these injustices, we have authored and supported landmark legislation to expand American Indian tribal governments’ criminal jurisdiction and sentencing authority while at the same time enhancing protections for criminal defendants in tribal courts.  To further that effort, the department has worked hard to support tribes through funding and training that improves the trial skills of tribal public defenders as well judges and prosecutors. 

    Of course, advancing access to justice for all also requires that we look critically at the Justice Department’s own role – and its own responsibility – as a central player in the federal criminal justice system.  Three years ago, the department launched the Smart on Crime initiative – a groundbreaking effort designed to reorient the way we approach criminal justice issues by diminishing the use of harsh mandatory sentences for low-level drug offenses; investing in rehabilitation and reentry programs that can reduce the likelihood of recidivism; and supporting vulnerable communities to prevent them from being caught up in the criminal justice system in the first place.  Additionally, we have embarked on an historic clemency initiative, allowing the President to commute sentences for more individuals than the last 11 Presidents combined.  And we have worked hard to get the incentives right in ensuring access to counsel in the federal system, including no longer requiring defendants in plea deals to waive future claims about whether their counsel was effective, and no longer allowing an immigrant convicted of a crime to be found deportable on the basis of alleged facts never established in the criminal case – a process unfair to immigrants who lack counsel and who may have agreed to plead guilty specifically to avoid immigration consequences. 

    Internationally, we have been proud partners with you on promoting equal access to justice, both in the criminal and civil arenas.  Since the U.N.’s unanimous adoption, just over a year ago, of the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, we have been working with the international community to breathe life into Global Goal 16, which calls on countries – including the United States – to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.”  To that end, the White House Legal Aid Interagency Roundtable (LAIR) was formally established. 

    The Roundtable works to identify how and when legal aid can improve federal programs that serve our nation’s vulnerable and underserved populations. By integrating civil legal aid into a wide array of federal programs designed to improve access to housing, health care services, employment and education, and enhance family stability and public safety, the programs are strengthened and objectives better met.  This month, the Roundtable will issue its first annual report to the President.  This report will detail the history of this interagency effort and provide concrete examples of how civil legal aid has been integrated into federal programs that support the poor and vulnerable.

    The Roundtable’s report will not be our only effort to track the progress toward fulfilling Goal 16 – and specifically Target 16.3, which calls on countries to “promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.”  In September, I announced the United States’ commitment to identifying national indicators for Target 16.3, joining other nations around the world, including in the Americas, who have started regional efforts to identify indicators. The United States’ effort, which is being led by the Department of Justice, and includes experts from across the federal government, will help develop national criminal and civil access to justice indicators so that we can rigorously gauge our progress towards the goal of equal justice for all Americans.   While we are still assessing what these indicators might be, we are exploring whether we can track the impact of criminal and civil legal aid on myriad aspects of the justice system.

    And because the United States is so strongly supportive of ensuring quality and effective criminal defense, we introduced the groundbreaking resolution at this year’s United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (UN Crime Commission) that you heard about yesterday to promote access to indigent defense, including through the creation of national, regional and international networks of legal aid providers.  Resolution 25/2: Promoting legal aid builds on past international activity, including the 2012 U.N.  Principles and Guidelines, and on the common sense idea that the best way to improve defense services across the globe is through peer-to-peer exchanges and learning.  The United States stands ready to share its experiences in promoting indigent defense and to learn from yours.

    Let me end where I began:  by thanking all of you for your participation in this conference, and for your commitment and perseverance to the work of promoting equal access to justice.  When my predecessor Tony West spoke at the inaugural gathering in South Africa, he was clear-eyed about both the progress that had been made in the provision of the right to counsel and the hard work that remained to be done.  Two years later, I echo Tony’s message.  Global efforts to support the right to counsel have never been stronger.  But we have much left to do. 

    Conferences like this one are a beginning not an end.   Long after this conference concludes, after all of us have returned home, after all the keynote speeches have been given and outcome documents adopted, there will remain the work of continuing to build criminal and civil legal systems that deliver the promise of equal justice under law for every individual, regardless of where they were born, their color or class, their religious faith or their sexual orientation.  That work will not be easy.  The progress will not always be uninterrupted.  But rest assured that the United States stands with you in this mutual endeavor.  We will remain an outspoken advocate on the importance of access to criminal legal aid at home and abroad.   We will continue to be a staunch ally in the fight for justice.  And we will remain a steadfast partner in the endeavor to build legal systems that are fair and effective for all.  I look forward to all that we will achieve – together – in the years ahead.  Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Acting Assistant Attorney General Renata Hesse of the Antitrust Division Delivers Remarks at the American Bar Association Fall Forum

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Protecting Competition Across 50 United States: Advocacy and Cooperation in Antitrust Enforcement

    Good morning and thank you for that introduction.  It was an honor to be invited to speak to you all this morning.  Getting to speak to folks like you is one of the benefits of serving as the Acting Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust at the Department of Justice, which is both a challenging and rewarding role.  Wow, have we been busy lately.  In addition to an unprecedented litigation and investigation caseload, with the FTC last month we issued new guidelines for human resources professionals, two weeks ago we proposed revisions to our international guidelines and we’re finalizing revisions to our intellectual property guidelines.  It’s an incredible time at the Antitrust Division.  

    On top of all that, I’ve had a fair number of these speaking opportunities lately, and I’ve been using them to discuss the great work the Antitrust Division has been doing.  A few months ago I spoke about our successes in civil enforcement, and more recently I’ve talked about the tremendous work of our criminal enforcers and the successes we’ve had in building relationships with our international counterparts.  I’ve intended these speeches not as exercises in chest-beating, but instead to be thoughtful assessments of where we are today, looking back over several decades of enforcement as we also look forward to the coming transition.  With this speech, I’d like to complete that retrospective by focusing on two particularly important, related areas of the Antitrust Division’s work: cooperation with our counterpart state enforcers and competition advocacy at the state level.  

    I say state cooperation and competition advocacy are related because they both incorporate the recognition that, notwithstanding the hard work of the Antitrust Division and the FTC, protecting competition is not a job the federal government can or should do alone.  Even as concentration has increased by certain metrics, our economy remains relatively disaggregated and threats to competition come in all shapes and sizes across our country. 

     Instead of just relying on prosecutorial work at the state and federal level, we combine enforcement with advocacy, and we partner with the states, other agencies and the business community to promote a competitive economy.  The states feature prominently in that mission.  As Alexander Hamilton told the New York Ratifying Convention:  The “states must…be considered as essential component parts of the union.”   That’s certainly true in antitrust enforcement, where they are essential component parts of the worthy effort to protect and promote competition throughout the American economy.  

    By the way I was going to do my best Lin Manuel Miranda impression for that Hamilton quote, but Bill MacCleod told me we weren’t allowed to rap at the Fall Forum.  

    Cooperative federalism works best on issues where the state and federal governments have a mutuality of interest, and that is certainly the case for antitrust enforcement.  The states and the federal government each hope to preserve and promote the competitive process that is the central organizing principle of our free market economy—our mutual economic strength relies on competition playing out across connected local and national markets.  While there may be some issues where state and federal goals diverge, antitrust is generally not one of them.  

    Then and Now – Antitrust Division Cooperation with State Antitrust Enforcers

    Although we are united in our goal of promoting competition, I cannot say there are never disagreements on how to achieve that goal.  As I’m sure you’ll hear today there are many perspectives on antitrust policy, and state enforcers share in that debate.  There have been times in the past where those policy disagreements were stark.  At the start of my career at the division, federal and state enforcers sometimes had very different views on how to apply the antitrust laws to promote competition.  In that environment cooperation between state and federal enforcers was less common, and tensions occasionally arose from differing perspectives on how to approach important enforcement decisions.  

    More recently, however, agreement has been much more common than disagreement, and the cooperation between state and federal antitrust enforcers has been excellent.  That success is no accident.  Constant nurturing from a great many hardworking people in state and federal government – and attention at all levels, from our career staffs right up to the top of our organizations – have helped foster the productive working relationships we enjoy today.  

    Christine Varney set a great tone in her 2009 speech on state cooperation, and she advanced that cause when she brought on Mark Tobey as the Antitrust Division’s Special Counsel for State Relations and Agriculture.  I have to give credit to Mark for his tireless efforts to make the partnership work well for the benefit of competition and the American consumer.  I know Edith Ramirez has also helped drive the federal side of the partnership in her role at the FTC.  

    Meanwhile the state attorneys general have contributed to the relationship with a number of important advocates.  I’d like to recognize the contributions of Vic Domen and Kathleen Foote, the current and immediately prior leaders of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) Multistate Antitrust Task Force, who are both here today, along with many others working through the Task Force and in the antitrust sections of State Attorneys General throughout the country.    

    Successful Cooperation in Civil Antitrust Enforcement  

    These consistent efforts to nurture the federal-state relationship have paid real enforcement dividends.  We’re proud at the division of our record of success.  As I’ve talked about before, our civil program is going strong, blocking 43 anticompetitive deals in important consumer industries like wireless, broadband, software, and appliances.  And we’ve brought a number of conduct cases in industries from publishing to high tech hiring to health care.  Our state partners have featured prominently in many of those cases.  I can fairly say that if you’ve recently used a health insurer, flown on a commercial airline, or paid a cell phone bill, then you’ve directly benefitted from cases where state cooperation played an important role.     

    The numbers bear out the level of cooperation we’ve enjoyed with our state partners.  Each of the six civil trial sections in the division has worked on enforcement matters with the states; collectively we have worked with all 50 States plus Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico.  In the last seven years we have brought 25 cases with the states resulting in settlement or final disposition after trial.  Five others are pending.

    The Apple e-books case is a remarkable example of effective federal-state cooperation.  The Texas Attorney General’s Office opened the original investigation into the conduct of the e-book publishers and Apple and investigated for a period of time before calling the Antitrust Division.  Early fact investigation work by Texas and Connecticut enabled the division to get up to speed quickly about the nature of the industry and the anticompetitive conduct that occurred.  In fact, some testimony from early depositions taken by Texas and Connecticut proved to be very important in the liability phase of the trial.  And, as a further result of productive coordination, the states’ economist testified at trial about price and output effects of the alleged conspiracy, testimony which worked in tandem with expert testimony from the division’s retained economist to tell a compelling economic story.

    A short anecdote from that case illustrates quite concretely the benefits of federal-state cooperation.  One of the best documents that provided evidence of the conspiracy to raise e-book prices – a document that wound up being featured in the opening paragraph of the Government’s Trial Brief – was found during document review by a staff attorney from the Arkansas Attorney General’s Office.  

    No less significant in e-books, the states, using their parens patriae authority, along with private class counsel, negotiated monetary relief totaling over $500 million from the publishers and Apple, returning over 200% of overcharges to e-book buyers.  A novel feature of the relief is that consumers who purchased e-books during the damages period could opt to have their payouts transferred directly to customer accounts at the various online e-book stores.

    The New York City tour buses case is another noteworthy example of federal-state cooperation.  In that case, the division teamed up with the New York Attorney General’s Antitrust Bureau to examine the combination of the two largest hop-on, hop-off sightseeing tour bus companies in New York City at the time – the red buses and the blue buses.  The merged entity, called Twin America, had an effective monopoly and seemed determined to try to evade antitrust scrutiny.  At various points in time over a period of nearly three years Twin America tried to maneuver the case away from the New York Antitrust Bureau, such as by filing an application for transfer of federal licenses which would be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board.  The New York Antitrust Bureau kept the matter alive over the course of these gyrations by filing opposition papers every step of the way.  

    Because of the New York Antitrust Bureau’s work, after the parties removed the jurisdictional impediment, our teams were in a position to conduct a brief investigation and then file a lawsuit in 2012 to unwind the combination and obtain disgorgement of profits obtained from a ticket price increase imposed on consumers by the merged firm.  As it happens, that was one of my first matters in my first stint as Acting Assistant Attorney General, back before Bill Baer arrived in 2012.  In 2015, after nearly three years of litigation, the parties entered into a joint federal-state settlement that provided substantial disgorgement under state and federal law and forced the parties to give up scarce tour bus stop authorizations from the City so that other firms could compete in the market.    

    A further illustration of how the division has opened up new and productive relationships with the states, in order to take advantage of unique state statutory powers, involves an initiative one of our Washington, D.C. criminal sections is now taking with the Georgia Department of Law.  Under this plan, the division will work with the Consumer Protection Unit of the Georgia Department of Law to distribute nearly $1 million in restitution funds to victims of the real estate foreclosure auction bid-rigging cases brought in the Atlanta area.  The Consumer Protection Unit has a long and successful record of returning overcharge damages to victims of all manner of consumer fraud cases and we sought to take advantage of those capabilities by partnering with them.  A joint letter from the division and the Department of Law will soon go out to the first group of victims.  

    Formal Guidance to Shape Conduct and Foster Cooperation 

    Our cooperation on civil enforcement is bolstered by the formal and informal guidance the division provides through guidelines, workshops, and speeches, to name a few examples.  This guidance helps illuminate our current practices and our thinking about critical issues of law and economics, and fosters communication between the division and our state counterparts.  Plus, we think it’s just good government to be as transparent and predictable in our approach as possible—it’s the right thing to do.     

    Over the past several years, our non-litigating sections have been busy updating guidelines and developing new guidance to help educate and inform industry and fellow antitrust enforcers.  

    Two weeks ago, we released proposed updates to the International Guidelines.  We added a chapter on international cooperation to reflect the growing importance of antitrust enforcement in the globalized economy, updated the discussion of the application of U.S. antitrust law to conduct involving foreign commerce, and provided examples that address the issues we most commonly encounter in our international efforts.  We’re also updating our IP Guidelines, and are in the process of finalizing them based on the feedback we received through a public comment process.  

    About a month ago, we released new guidance for human resource professionals to educate them about how the antitrust laws apply to their job responsibilities and inform them of the division’s recent enforcement actions.  As part of this guidance, we made clear that going forward employers who conspire to hold down wages or restrict hiring of each other’s workers will be investigated criminally and, if appropriate, prosecuted criminally.  Naked “no-poaching” agreements or agreements to fix wages stamp out competition just like agreements to allocate customers or to fix product prices, violations of the law that the division has traditionally investigated criminally and prosecuted as hardcore cartel conduct.  We hope this guidance will help HR professionals implement safeguards to prevent inappropriate discussions or agreements with other firms seeking to hire similar employees.   

    We expect these updates will facilitate even greater coordination with state enforcers in our efforts to protect competition.

    State Legislative Efforts and Competition Advocacy 

    In addition to working with our counterpart antitrust enforcers in the offices of the State Attorneys General, we also work productively with state legislatures and regulatory bodies.  Later today I understand there will be discussion about how state law and regulation can work to open, and unfortunately sometimes close, markets.  It is important that state lawmakers are mindful of the consequences on competition of their actions and understand how legislation or policies can enhance or cripple competition. 

    The landscape within which state enforcers operate is different from the federal environment.  State attorneys general face the challenge of balancing their role as enforcers of state and federal competition law with the obligation to counsel professional licensing and regulatory agencies about the potential to displace competition.  They must balance their institutional role as advocates for free and fair markets with occasional pressure from state lawmakers to restrict markets and insulate local firms from emerging technologies and non-traditional competitors.  Recognizing this tension, it can be helpful for the federal antitrust agencies to weigh in regarding proposed state and local legislation to seek to vindicate competition principles.  

    State officials sometimes seek our views on the competitive significance of state legislation and policies.  We welcome those requests and are eager to share our expertise in a way that can help advance both legal frameworks and policies in the direction of more efficient and well-functioning markets, or to shape corporate behavior away from harmful anticompetitive conduct.  Additionally, inherent in these competition advocacy efforts is fruitful dialogue and learning that advances the division’s expertise.  

    States can play a critical role in addressing and preventing anticompetitive conduct through their own legislative efforts.  For example, in 2010 the Division sued Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan alleging that “most favored nation” provisions in its agreements with hospitals raised prices, discouraged discounts, and prevented competitive insurers from entering the market.  About two years later, Michigan enacted a law that banned these harmful clauses.  This move alleviated our concerns and now benefits competition and consumers throughout the state of Michigan.  Several other states have also enacted similar legislation. 

    We have also weighed in over the years on how state regulatory or legislative actions can sometimes close markets off from competition.  For example, the division, together with the FTC, has long supported repealing or scaling back state certificate of need laws.  These laws typically require certain health care providers to obtain state approval before establishing new facilities, providing new services or making certain large capital expenditures.  This can create barriers to competition by delaying or prohibiting entry and, as a result, can limit consumer choice and stifle innovation.  We’ve shared these views most recently with officials in South Carolina, Virginia, Michigan, Illinois and Florida. 

    The division, often with the FTC, has also been active in educating legislatures about how scope of practice laws, which define the set of professionals allowed to perform particular services, can limit competition for consumer services.  For example: 

    • In Massachusetts and Puerto Rico we advocated for legislation expanding the scope of practice laws to permit optometrists to provide certain treatments for glaucoma, thereby expanding competition and access to care.  
    • In the legal services realm, we have discouraged overly broad practice of law definitions that limit competition from non-lawyers for services that are not necessary to address legitimate and substantiated harms.  In July, the division and the FTC encouraged the adoption of legislation in North Carolina that would provide consumers with the ability to use interactive software programs to fill out legal forms.  
    • Similarly in the real estate industry, we’ve weighed in on the benefits of competition from brokers who offer “fee-for-service” options for consumers and have cautioned against restricting these new consumer-friendly competitive choices.  

    The division also recently submitted a statement on the potential anticompetitive effects of certain legislative proposals in California that would ban or limit contracts between court reporters or service firms and third parties, such as insurance companies, for multi-case contracts.

    Whether advocating in favor of state laws that help keep markets open, or working to help state legislatures understand the negative impacts on competition their laws might cause, we have great respect for the state legislative process.  While we as antitrust enforcers have a singular goal of competition, legislatures have to balance a host of potentially competing public policy goals that aren’t squarely in our purview.  All we can hope to do is foster an increased understanding and a deeper appreciation for the competition dimension of those decisions.  That’s the same approach we take in all the advocacy we do with other federal agencies and international enforcers as well.  
     
    Looking forward

    I hope that what you’ve heard in these remarks is that the Antitrust Division works hard to promote competition not only in our own cases, but also through our cooperation with and advocacy before our state counterparts.  And I also hope you’ve gotten some sense for the sustained commitment that this work requires from a great many talented people.  

    Our work advocating for competition with our state partners is never done.  In just four days, trial will start in the Anthem/Cigna merger challenge brought by the division alongside 11 states and Washington, D.C.  I won’t comment on pending cases, but we look forward to working with the states as that important matter proceeds.  

    With an eye toward the future, allow me to conclude with some suggestions on federal-state cooperation in the cases to come.

    For practitioners, I suggest embracing federal-state cooperation.  It’s not in anyone’s interest to have divergent federal and state investigations and enforcement outcomes.  Grant waivers early in investigations, and encourage state participation in Civil Investigative Demand (CID) depositions and party meetings.  These steps will often reduce the investigative burdens on your clients and foster a dialogue that will simplify resolution or settlement if possible under the circumstances.    

    For the federal and state enforcement agencies, I’d encourage continued investment in the relationships that make cooperation work.  As I mentioned earlier, those relationships were not always as strong as they are today, and I really believe they benefit from constant nurturing.  Today’s event provides a perfect opportunity for the kind of engagement that keeps our organizations connected, and I see many of our state counterparts out in the audience.  I look forward to catching up with you all today—enjoy the Fall Forum.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Bill Baer Delivers Remarks at 2016 American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month Observance Program

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Thank you, Tracy [Toulou], for your kind words and for the contributions you and your dedicated team at the Office of Tribal Justice (OTJ) have made to promote tribal justice and public safety in Indian country.  And thank you to Director Richard Toscano and the Justice Management Division (JMD) Equal Employment Opportunity Staff (EEOS) for organizing today’s observance program and to Gina Allery and the DOJ Native American Association for their support as well.  

    In the month of November, we honor the history and traditions of America’s indigenous peoples.  We join together today to celebrate American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month and to welcome our keynote speaker, Tracy Canard Goodluck, to the department. 

    The theme this year – “Serving Our Nations” – captures the work that we together are doing here at the department.  That shared commitment to improving the daily lives of tribal communities has made and will continue to make a difference.  Here are just a few highlights: 

    • We worked across components to secure passage of landmark legislation with the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA), which reaffirmed our commitment to building and sustaining healthier, safer tribal communities and renewed our enduring promise to respect sovereignty and self-determination.  Our efforts also helped secure passage of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Reauthorization, which recognizes tribes’ inherent power to exercise “special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction” over certain defendants regardless of their Indian or non-Indian status.
    • We built and began implementing the Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP), which provides federally recognized tribes access to national crime information databases for both civil and criminal purposes.  Just last month, we announced an expansion of TAP incorporating feedback from participating tribes who identified and shared best practices to further strengthen tribal institutions’ ability to keep communities safe.
    • Over the past seven years, the department has awarded over 1,650 Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation (CTAS) grant awards to American Indian tribes, Alaska Native villages, tribal consortia and tribal designees to improve public safety in Tribal communities and to strengthen tribal justice systems.  These figures include 236 CTAS grants totaling more than $102 million that were awarded in the recently completed 2016 grant cycle.
    • We established the Gaye Tenoso Indian Country Fellowship.  The program honors a former 30-year Department of Justice attorney by creating public service opportunities in Indian country for young lawyers with expertise and a commitment to federal Indian law, tribal law, and Indian country issues.
    • We published the Department of Justice Consultation Policy and the Attorney General’s Statement of Principles for Working with Federally Recognized Indian Tribes, both of which are intended to guide the work of this department in Indian country going forward.
    • We created the Tribal National Leadership Council, a democratically-elected group of tribal leaders responsible for advising the Attorney General.
    • We established the National Indian Country Training Initiative to ensure that the department prosecutors, as well as state and tribal criminal justice personnel, receive the training and support needed to address the particular challenges relevant to Indian country. 
    • And we built law enforcement partnerships between the FBI and sister agencies and identified tribal liaisons within each U.S. Attorney’s Office that has Indian country within its jurisdiction.  Indeed, I was privileged to meet many of these dedicated Assistant U.S. Attorneys (AUSAs) in a recent visit to the Flathead Reservation in Montana.
    • We have shown that we can collaborate effectively across the department and across the federal government to better serve Indian country.  The department’s work on the Indian Child Welfare Act—involving the Environment and Natural Resources Division, the Office of Tribal Justice, the Civil Rights Division, and the Office of Justice Programs, as well as the Departments of the Interior and Health and Human Services—is just one example.  Our efforts have promoted compliance with this important federal law that seeks to keep Indian children with their parents, extended families, and tribal communities. 

    We can point with pride to the Environment and Natural Resource Division’s (ENRD) work to protect tribal resources, water rights and treaty hunting and fishing rights and to its defense of the Department of the Interior’s authority to acquire land into trust for tribes.  Recent victories in both the district court and the court of appeals helped preserve the treaty fishing rights of Pacific Northwest Tribes by removing barriers to salmon passage.  ENRD’s efforts recognize the importance of protecting the environment and natural resources of the First Nations, who were also the first environmental stewards of this great land and from whom we still have much to learn.

    I am pleased to report that the department has continued to make progress in resolving long-standing tribal trust cases.  In 2016 alone, we reached settlements with 17 tribes for almost $493 million.  Since the start of the Obama Administration, the department has settled the claims of 104 tribes for a total of $3.35 billion.  These settlements represent a significant milestone in improving the government-to-government relationship between the United States and Indian tribes, and allow the federal government and the tribal nations to move beyond tensions that were exacerbated by litigation.

    Even as we celebrate the progress we have made, we must acknowledge that our work is far from finished.  We have all been watching events in North Dakota over the weekend.  History teaches that we make progress in the face of conflicting views where we honor the right to disagree peacefully with one another.  The Justice Department has been in communication with local law enforcement, as well as tribal representatives and protesters, to promote communication and lower tensions.  We will continue those efforts. 

    There are a lot of challenges in Indian country, and it continues to be the responsibility of those of us at the department to identify and correct the injustices that persist.  I am proud to be affiliated with a department that does not shy away from tackling those challenges, and embraces the opportunity to work directly with Tribes across the country.

    Before we move on to the next part of our program, I would like to recognize the work of Lorraine Edmo, the Deputy Director for Tribal Affairs at the Office on Violence Against Women and a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes.  She has dedicated her decades-long career to seeking out and correcting injustice in Tribal communities. 

    Lorraine is retiring soon and will be greatly missed.  Her sustained dedication to supporting Tribal communities has been an inspiration.  Thank you, Lorraine, for your tremendous service.  We are grateful that your husband, Jerry Cordova of the Department of the Interior, is also participating here today.  We especially respect public service when it’s a family affair, and we wish you both well.  

    I now turn to the privilege of introducing our keynote speaker, Tracy Canard Goodluck of the Oneida and Mvskoke Creek Nations.  Her passion for education and improving outcomes for students in tribal communities has made her a role model to many.  In her current role of Senior Associate Director in the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, Tracy serves as a key liaison to tribal communities for the Administration.  Previously, she was a policy advisor at the Domestic Policy Council and, as a Presidential Management Fellow, handled the legislative portfolio for Indian affairs at the U.S. Department of the Interior.  We are honored to have her here today.  Please join me in welcoming Tracy Canard Goodluck.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at Funeral for U.S. Marshals Service Deputy Commander Patrick Carothers

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Good afternoon, everyone. To the pastor and members of the Buford Church of God – the spiritual home of the Carothers family; to the President and staff of the Greater Atlanta Christian Academy – the educational home of the Carothers family, who have come together and given us this beautiful service in this special place; Deputy Attorney General [Sally] Yates; Director [David] Harlow; distinguished guests; family and friends; and, most importantly, Terry, Michael, Matthew, Paul, Jessica, and Connor: 

    I bring you condolences from the entire Department of Justice family, of which Patrick Carothers was a beloved member. And I also bring you condolences from the President and First Lady of the United States, which I will share with you now.

    We gather here today with bruised spirits and broken hearts. Whether we knew Patrick Carothers as a colleague, a friend, a father – even if we did not have the privilege of knowing him personally – we feel his loss deeply. And we feel his presence still. I did not have the privilege of meeting Deputy Commander Carothers, but after meeting with his teammates and family today, I feel as if I knew him.  

    I see him in the heartfelt regard and honor and loyalty of his colleagues; I see him not just in the faces but the faith, the fortitude, and the light in the children he was raising and the family he loved so much. And we all see him in the respect and regard and love of the people whose lives he touched, so many of whom are here today to honor him.

    For he was the kind of person we hope our children will grow up to become. He was a person of integrity, who loved his family, strengthened his community, and served his country.  He was a person of strength, possessed of quiet courage and deep compassion. And he was a person of action, who chose a career in law enforcement in order to protect the vulnerable and help those who cannot help themselves.  

    Deputy Commander Carothers represented the very best that our country has to offer. That someone like him should be taken from us in such a senseless way shocks our conscience. It chills our hearts. And it can shake our faith.  

    I do not claim to have any answers for why this horrible deed happened. Nor do I pretend that our pain can be erased with a few words; true comfort comes only through time and the grace of God. But I do know that Deputy Commander Carothers did not die in vain. For he served the cause of justice. Where justice is present, we glimpse a gentler and more peaceful world, one where every person lives in safety and dignity. Justice challenges us to do our part to bring that world into being. It challenges us to close the gap between the world as it is and the world as it should be. It calls each of us to devote our lives to something larger than ourselves.  

    Patrick Carothers accepted that challenge. For 26 years, he answered that call. He pledged his energy, his talent – and, if necessary, his life – to the safety and well-being of the American people. Taking that pledge made him a U.S. Marshal – a proud member of the nation’s oldest law enforcement agency. Keeping that pledge until his last breath made him a hero. He can stand before his maker and echo Paul’s words to Timothy: “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

    To Deputy Commander Carothers’ fellow Marshals: I want you to know that as your Attorney General, there is nothing more difficult than burying a member of our department – our family. The dangers that you and your fellow law enforcement officers face; the sacrifices that you make; the hazards that you accept: these are never far from my mind and I want you to know how humbled I am by your valor and dedication.

    To Deputy Commander Carothers’s relatives and loved ones: my heart aches for you. I can only imagine the depth of your sorrow and the intensity of your pain. Terry, you were clearly Patrick’s light and his strength. And the children that you raised together are a testament to the bond you shared. I especially want to say to Michael, Matthew, Paul, Jessica, and Connor that your father lives on in you. You have clearly inherited his spirit, his strength and his compassion, and he will continue to shape and improve our world through your lives. Please know that the entire Department of Justice family grieves with you and is here for you. In the days ahead, we will strive to honor his legacy not only with our words, but with our deeds; not only by remembering his name, but by continuing his work – his work for a stronger, a safer and a more just United States.

    May God bless the memory of Deputy Commander Patrick Carothers, and may He grant him eternal rest and peace.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Bill Baer Delivers Remarks Highlighting Elder Justice at the State Of Financial Fraud in America Event

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you Robert for that kind introduction and for your leadership and dedication as CEO of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).  And thank you to the Stanford Center on Longevity and the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, for hosting this conference and for the great work that you do.  It is an honor to join with the many people in this audience who dedicate their lives to combatting financial fraud and protecting elderly Americans.  This is a noble and enduring effort.   

    As many people here know, financial fraud targeted at the elderly is a serious problem.  At the beginning of 2011, the first Baby Boomers reached the age of 65.  I reached that milestone myself just last year.  Indeed, 10,000 Americans turn 65 every day, and the percentage of Americas over 65 is growing.  5.8 percent of this group experiences identity theft in a given year.  I had that ugly experience just last month. 13.8 percent experiences consumer fraud in a given year.  4.5 percent of people over 50 experience financial fraud in a five-year period.  While there are varying accounts about how much the overall financial loss is, it is well into the billions of dollars.  

    Statistics aside, we are here together because we know all too well that this is a problem that takes a personal toll.  Almost all of us know someone who has been the victim of financial fraud.  And while it affects people of all ages, it can be especially devastating for elderly people, many of whom are dependent on their savings and are concerned about their own mental decline or other people’s perception of their mental decline.  

    I recently saw letters written by the victims of a set of schemes that we took action against.  One described having sent “hundreds of checks” for a company’s “great offers” and tried to explain to the fraudster that “due to bad eyes, [he] has to use magnifying glasses to read” and had “been caught paying many times for th[e] very same offer.”  Another, believing that the con men would send him a promised gift, tried to explain that he had sent his prior payments by money order and was now enclosing cash, “all [he] can send.”  Another explained that when she gets the vast inheritance she’d been promised, she would use it to help her family, the homeless and needy children.   

    The nature and scope of elder fraud varies tremendously.  At the Department of Justice, we see small, family based schemes, such as caregivers tricking elderly victims out of their savings or abusing powers of attorney.  We see institutional schemes, such as nursing homes that provide unnecessary services or bill for services never provided.  And we see global fraud networks that are—quite literally—organized crime.  These schemes involve networks of businesses with careful divisions of labor.  They target millions of Americans, maintain lists of victims, and, once someone has been duped, target those people again and again. One recent victim wrote a letter explaining: “Each day I keep getting more and more offers and it’s almost impossible for me to keep up with them.” 

    Large and diverse problems like this require broad based solutions.  We at the Department of Justice know we can’t solve this problem alone.  Coordination is essential not only with our federal partners, but with local, state and international authorities.  And public and private partnerships are key to our understanding of the scope of the problem and to the lasting success of any solution.

    Research into basic questions, such as why are elderly people vulnerable, and how can we detect fraud and abuse, is critical to attacking the problem.  The FINRA Foundation and Stanford Center on Longevity launched the Financial Fraud Research Center five years ago.  As some of your ongoing research has demonstrated, there is a natural decline in cognition as people age, especially ability to think fast and process new information.  The elderly are sometimes lonely or otherwise socially isolated. Some are uncomfortable with technology.  Many have pools of relatively liquid retirement assets.  Some are dependent on caregivers.  All of these factors make the elderly particularly susceptible to certain schemes. 

    There is much more to learn.  The Department of Justice has invested in partnerships to help us all better understand the causes and risk factors associated with elder financial exploitation.  For example, just a few weeks ago, we announced an award of nearly $800,000 to the Urban Institute and the University of Southern California to develop and test prevention programs that will address elder abuse, neglect and financial exploitation.  To enhance our understanding of financial exploitation by conservators and guardians, last year our Office for Victims of Crime funded a project to search for innovative, evidence-based programs and practices that successfully detect and remedy conservator fraud.  And people like you are furthering our understanding.  This conference is highlighting emerging research on susceptibility to fraud and fraud prevention.

    Beyond efforts to understand how and why elder fraud occurs, continuing dedication to enforcement is required to stop it.   This is not a partisan issue.  We have seen Democratic and Republican administrations alike express a shared commitment to using all tools in the Department of Justice’s enforcement arsenal.  Back in the 1990s, under Attorney General Reno, the Department of Justice created the Elder Justice Initiative to centralize information, facilitate training, and coordinate within the Department and across the federal government.  During the Bush Administration, the Department of Justice initiated an elder mistreatment research grant program, funding cutting edge research on elder abuse and financial exploitation that continues today.

    During this Administration, Congress created the Elder Justice Coordinating Council as part of the Affordable Care Act to facilitate interagency cooperation at the highest of levels.  At the Department of Justice, we formed the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee’s Elder Justice Working Group, which is comprised of U.S. Attorneys from across the country who are dedicated to improving our information sharing on financial scams targeting the elderly.  And just this year, we created ten regional Elder Justice Task Forces that operate throughout the country, partnering with state and local law enforcement and prosecutors to enhance our collective response to elder financial fraud and abuse. 

    Our Elder Justice Initiative has also been assisting with community capacity building.  This includes supporting the training of local law enforcement and prosecutors.  And to enhance civil legal aid to seniors, in June 2016, the Department of Justice, in collaboration with the Corporation for National and Community Service, launched the Elder Justice AmeriCorps, the first-ever army of lawyers and paralegals to help elderly victims of abuse and exploitation.  The program will support 300 AmeriCorps members throughout the country and is expected to reach over 8,000 older adults over the next two years.

    A multi-faceted problem requires coordination between different federal agencies; it demands a whole of government approach.  Mail is involved; we must coordinate with the Postal Inspection Service.  Money is involved; we must coordinate with the Treasury Department.  People target the elderly; we must coordinate with agencies that serve the elderly, such as the Social Security Administration.  

    And more and more, we are seeing schemes that are highly complex and global.  Stopping these schemes require extensive cooperation—not just with state and local authorities, but also across the federal government and with our international counterparts.  For example, the Department of Justice’s Consumer Protection Branch co-chairs the International Mass-Marketing Fraud Working Group, a network of civil and criminal law enforcement agencies from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Europol, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.  

    We can point to meaningful progress.  In the past several years, we have successfully shut down several international lottery scams where con men and women have contacted elderly victims in the United States, told the victims they won cash and prizes, and persuaded them to send thousands of dollars in fees to release the money.  Of course, the victims never received cash or prizes in return.  In a series of cases, perpetrators made calls from Jamaica using Voice Over Internet Protocol technology that made it appear as if the calls were coming from the United States.  They convinced victims to send money to middlemen in South Florida and North Carolina, who forwarded the money to Jamaica.  We have had great success breaking up these networks through joint efforts between Jamaican law enforcement and U.S. agencies including the Postal Inspection Service, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Marshals Service, Federal Trade Commission and Internal Revenue Service.  Since 2009, the Department of Justice has prosecuted or is prosecuting over 100 individuals linked to such lottery schemes, and has convicted and sentenced over 40 defendants.

    We have had similar success going after global “psychic schemes.”  Con men and women send letters purportedly written by “world-renowned psychics” stating that they had a vision revealing that the recipient has the opportunity to obtain great wealth.  The letters appear personalized, refer to the recipient by name, and often contain portions that appear handwritten.  The solicitations urge victims to purchase products and services that will ensure this good fortune.  Investigations by the Department of Justice and Postal Inspection Service, among others, revealed the complexity of these schemes.  Not only were there the fraudsters themselves, but there were separate companies performing different roles, such as processing victim payments and maintaining databases of consumers who responded to solicitations.  In a two-week period, one company in the United States processed as much as $500,000 in payments for just one psychic scheme.  We have discovered similar companies in Quebec, Hong Kong, Switzerland and France.  

    Perhaps the most significant example of cooperation to date were our wide-ranging enforcement actions taken in September of this year to dismantle a global network of mass mailing schemes targeting elderly and vulnerable victims.  The schemes involved a network with components in Canada, France, India, the Netherlands, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey and the United States.   The network included an India-based printer that manufactured solicitations and arranged for bulk shipment to U.S. victims; a mailer in Switzerland; list brokers in the United States who bought and sold lists of victims so that once victims had fallen prey, others could target them; a “caging” service in the Netherlands that collected money; and a Canadian payment processor that, for more than 20 years, helped dozens of international fraudsters gain access to U.S. banks and take money from Americans.  Stopping this network involved coordination between the Department of Justice, Department of Treasury, Postal Inspection Service, Federal Trade Commission, Iowa Attorney General’s office and counterparts in other countries.  Just to give you a sample of the coordinated actions, on Sept. 22, 2016: 

    • The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control blocked assets from the Canadian payment processor and a network of individuals and entities across 18 countries.
    • The Justice Department filed criminal charges and a civil injunction against a Turkish mass mailer. 
    • The Justice Department brought a series of civil actions to shut down companies based in the United States, India, Switzerland and Singapore.  These companies were responsible for mailing millions of multi-piece solicitations to potential victims throughout the United States.  
    • The Justice Department entered into a consent decree with two Dutch “caging” businesses that collected and forward money.  Our efforts were coordinated with Dutch authorities who executed search warrants on the businesses and took control of the Dutch post office boxes used to receive victims’ funds.   
    • The Federal Trade Commission filed a case against a related mass-mailer, printer, and list broker.  
    • The Iowa Attorney General negotiated a compliance agreement with two firms that brokered victim lists.

    Of course, what matters even more than going after these schemes is preventing people from falling prey in the first place.  Here too, federal agencies are working in cooperation and dedicated to the effort.   The Department of Justice has distributed educational materials about these kinds of scams, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service has developed an electronic press kit for media outlets, my former colleagues at the Federal Trade Commission operate a “Pass It On” campaign that encourages people to share information about frauds that affect older Americans, the Social Security Administration is educating beneficiaries through its network of over 1,200 field offices nationwide, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has produced a mail fraud alert placemat in coordination with Meals on Wheels America to distribute to seniors nationwide.  Similarly, private organizations that work in the area of elder justice and consumer protection are doing their part.  For example, AARP will be posting information through its Fraud Watch Network.  And the Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, is alerting consumers about a variety of elder scams.  

    Going forward, the Department of Justice will continue to work with private, local, state, federal and global partners.   And we urge all of you to tell us where the Department can do more.  The federal government’s work on behalf of the elderly began long before this Administration, and it will continue long after.  I expect that my successors, and my successors’ successors, will share our commitment to making sure our parents, grandparents and friends age with grace and dignity.  And I look forward to all of you, who have worked so hard in this area, working with the next Administration to combat financial fraud and protect elderly Americans.  Thank you again for having me here today.  

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at United States Military Academy

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for that warm welcome.  I am so grateful to be here today.  I also want to thank Lieutenant General [Robert] Caslen and Brigadier General [Diana] Holland for their tremendous leadership here at West Point, and for their gracious invitation to address the Cow Class of the Corps of Cadets.  And I want to acknowledge my colleague, Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General [Bill] Baer, who is here with me today.  Bill does a tremendous job of leading the Justice Department’s Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative, which is our most important program to secure the rights of our men and women in uniform.

    What an honor it is to stand before you today in this venerable place.  This campus is unlike any other in the United States – and not just because it’s the only one that Benedict Arnold once tried to sell to the British.  Few institutions have had a greater hand in molding the United States into the nation it is today than West Point.  Your fellow alumni include two distinguished presidents: Dwight Eisenhower, who I believe said that failing to make the West Point baseball team was one of his life’s greatest disappointments, and Ulysses S. Grant, who wrote in his memoirs that each year at West Point “seemed about five times as long” as a year back home.  They may have grumbled about their time here by the Hudson – something I am sure you have never done – but this much is clear: the path that led them to the highest office in public service began right here at West Point.

    There is no doubt that this institution has a proud and rich history.  But West Point is not simply a monument to the past.  It is a gateway to our future.  And that is why I look on each of you with such great pride and excitement.  Because each of you has taken that future into your hands.  When you were not yet 18, you made a choice.  You chose to embark on an education that demands more of you than almost any other institution demands of students your age. You made a choice to forego many of the traditional comforts of college for a more challenging path.  Before you could even vote, you made a choice that for at least the next nine years, the watchwords of your life would be “Duty, Honor, Country.”  That is an enormous testament to your character.  And that is a tremendous gift to our nation.

    I am moved by the sacrifices that you have made, and that you will make.  The conflict of my childhood was Vietnam, a place that meant nothing to me until it reached into my world and took my family members away.  It’s a history lesson now, but I still vividly remember my cousins and uncle going off to Vietnam, when I was a young girl.  My father, a minister, had a family prayer service for them the night before they left.  I remember being struck by the magnitude of their sacrifice.  It was the first time I ever really knew someone who was prepared to give his or her life for an ideal – for someone else’s freedom.  Their country had called and they had answered, and that was more important than their own comfort or safety.  Over the years I watched as other family members, including my own brother, made the choice to serve their country in the armed forces.  Their example has stayed with me throughout my life, and it has never been far from my mind during my years with the Department of Justice.   That sense of sacrifice and devotion to a greater mission – which was instinctive to my family members who served, and which has brought all of you to West Point – is perhaps the most important ingredient I can think of in the creation of a leader.  As a famous graduate of this school, General [Norman] Schwarzkopf, once said: “Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character.  But if you must be without one, be without strategy.”

    And that is what I want to talk to you about today: why we need your character more than ever.  It seems that our news cycles too frequently feature stories of rancor and division.  Many of those stories give voice to those raising the question of what kind of leadership we want for our nation.  I believe the answer to that question can be found here at West Point.  And not simply because of your substantive knowledge, or your training to lead one of our most vital institutions in the most difficult of situations.  Rather, it is because a West Point education is concerned not only with what you know, but with who you are.  It is concerned not only with your mastery of strategy, but with your empathy and ability to understand those who are starkly different from you – whether they serve in your platoon or sit across from you at the negotiation table.  It is concerned not only with your physical prowess, but with the resilience of your moral core.  It is concerned not just with your sterling credentials, but your resolve to use those abilities to serve others.  In short, I believe that your West Point education is giving you the very tools we need in all walks of life, military and civilian alike: the ability – and the responsibility – to bridge the gap among our fellow Americans.  

    It is clear why you are receiving this important and rigorous education.  You will lead men and women through the most trying of circumstances.  It will be up to you to show those in your command that their common goals transcend their individual differences.  It will be up to you to ask them to do things they may not believe themselves capable of doing.  It will be up to you to bring out the best in those you lead.  And you will only be able to convince them to do those things if you do them yourself – exactly as you are learning to do here.  And when you do that – when you realize that leadership is the ultimate form of service to and for others – then those in your command will surprise you, and themselves, with their selflessness, with their decency, and with their ability to join in a common cause.  This is precisely the leadership that we also need, at this moment, in our national discourse, in our communities, and in our homes.  Because as challenging as your military career will be, some of your greatest leadership challenges will come when you are out of uniform, in a world that doesn’t always exemplify the lessons you have learned here.  How will you lead when a child you know is being bullied for being of a different race or religion?  How will you lead when someone with whom you disagree needs your help?  How will you lead when someone feels ignored or even targeted by the very government we are all sworn to serve?  People will listen and look up to you.  What will you say to them?  Those are the times when you will truly lean on the lessons of this great institution – that true leaders speak up for those whose voice cannot be heard, protect the weak from the strong, and always focus on the common goals and principles that overcome our differences. 

    Being a leader often brings fulfillment, recognition and rewards.  But it also brings unexpected moments.  People once your peers may surprise themselves and you by not being completely happy for you, and that will hurt.  Along with the acclaim you will also receive criticism, questioning your decisions, your motives, even your integrity, and that will sting.  And, although it may be hard to believe – especially for you engineers out there – there will come a time when you will make mistakes, and disappoint others and yourself.  We all fall down.  It’s how you get up that tells the world who you are, even more than the rank on your sleeve.  And how you respond to these challenges will confirm or deny everything that you have said about leadership in less fraught times.  Because these are the times you show the content of your character.  These are the times you must summon what is best in you – your courage, your integrity and your honor.  These are the moments that count.  These are the moments when you realize that true leadership focuses not on you, but on the institution you lead and the mission it serves.  

    In my life, I have been fortunate that that institution is the Department of Justice, and the mission is the protection of the American people and the upholding of the rule of law.  And in my most difficult moments, first as a U.S. Attorney, and now as Attorney General of the United States, I have always been well served by reminding myself that my first responsibility is not to what others think of me, but to what my institution can do for others.

    You have also committed to serving an institution: the U.S. military.  I have no doubt that you will use your talents to uphold its proud traditions and to leave it an even stronger institution than you found it.  We will be a safer and better people for your service defending our country and its values.  But I also ask you to consider yourselves servants of these United States.  The motto of this institution is not “Duty, Honor, Army” – although it will be, for a brief moment, on December 10.  The motto is “Duty, Honor, Country.”  And I want you to take that motto seriously.  Because the division and disunity that we now see too often is symptomatic of a deeper pain in our people – pain that we must learn to heal. At a time when rhetoric and ideology divide us, and bitterness and mistrust tear at the fabric of our democracy, we need you to model service to a larger cause.  We need you to remind us that our responsibility as Americans is to promote the welfare of all our people; to protect the vulnerable and the weak; and to ensure that the nation we leave for our children is better than the one our parents inherited.   We need you to bring us back to the heart of our greatness, the beauty of our different voices, paths and faces coming together as one people.  We need you to remind us of what we have achieved together, in the early motto of this great country:  E pluribus unum.  Out of many, one.

    That is my challenge to you today: be leaders not just of our military, but of our country.  Wherever life takes you beyond West Point – whether you stay in the armed forces for life, or whether you choose a different path – I challenge you to continue to be servant leaders.  Inspire others to serve causes larger than themselves.  Bring the lessons of sacrifice and selflessness that you have learned to our boardrooms, our classrooms, to the halls of Congress.  Show the American people that “Duty, Honor, Country,” is a motto not only for the proud few who pass through West Point, but for every person, in every community.  You are uniquely positioned to perform this essential work, and as I look out over this exemplary group of men and women, I am filled with hope: hope that we will continue marching together toward a brighter future; hope that we will transcend our divisions and bridge our divides; and hope that our nation’s best days still lie ahead. 

    I want to thank you all for having me here.  I look forward to seeing everything you will achieve as you assume the heavy – and honorable – mantle of leadership. 

    May God bless you all, and shelter your dreams with his everlasting grace.  May God bless all of our men and women in uniform, and hold their safety in the palm of his hand.  And may God continue to bless the United States of America.

    Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Head of the Civil Rights Division Vanita Gupta Delivers Remarks at University of North Carolina Center for Civil Rights Conference

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Good morning, everyone, and thank you, Ted [Shaw], for that warm welcome.  I want to thank the University of North Carolina’s Center for Civil Rights for organizing this energizing conference and inviting me to join you today.  It’s humbling to be part of a program with such a distinguished group of civil rights leaders.  I see many dear friends and colleagues in this room.  Through advocacy and academia, through service and leadership – you have devoted your careers to the cause of justice and the fight for equality.                                                                                                                                    

    For just over two years, I’ve had the enormous privilege and great honor to lead the Civil Rights Division’s work in that fight.  At times, my tenure has been filled with moments of tragedy and anguish.  And there is no doubt that events in recent years have exposed and exacerbated stark divisions of ideology and open wounds of racial tension across America.  I’ve sat with grieving families who lost their loved ones in officer-involved shootings.  I’ve attended funerals of officers killed in the line of duty.  I’ve seen how the inequities in our criminal justice system can destroy lives and derail futures.  And I’ve been all too aware of how some of the most vulnerable among us encounter a real gap between what the law guarantees, on one hand, and what they experience in their daily lives, on the other – from courtrooms, to voting precincts, to public bathrooms.

    Yet I firmly believe that these are also times of possibility, of opportunity and of hope.  Because amidst the tragedies and divisions, I’ve seen police officers and residents working together to promote community-oriented policing strategies.  I’ve seen firsthand these past two years – in meetings, conferences and roundtables around the country – law enforcement leaders stand up and speak out to transform the profession, embracing de-escalation tactics, procedural justice and a smart-on-crime approach.  And I’ve seen how people from different walks of life can come together to engage in America’s imperfect, but unyielding journey of progress towards a more inclusive country and a more just union.

    For nearly six decades – from prosecuting the 1964 murder of three civil rights workers in Mississippi; to combating segregation in education; to enforcing the Fair Housing Act; to preventing discrimination in lending, whether in redlining or underwriting; to defending the civil rights of LGBT men and women here in North Carolina – the division’s career lawyers have played a pivotal role in our country’s quest for justice.  The division vigorously enforces civil rights laws to make the promises of equal justice, equal protection and equal opportunity real for all.  We work to restore faith in the legitimacy of our justice system.  And we work to defend the integrity of our democracy.  Because discrimination, inequality and injustice don’t only harm individuals.  They threaten entire communities.  They breed cynicism and despair.  And they erode trust in our public institutions – trust essential to upholding the rule of law, to advancing public safety and to engaging in our centuries-old democratic experiment of effective self-governance.

    In stark terms and in real time, we’ve seen this connection between discrimination and distrust play out around the country through the lens of community-police relations.  Sometimes, a particular incident ignites public outrage and unrest.  And let be me clear: when law enforcement officials flout the law, the Civil Rights Division works to prosecute criminal misconduct and hold them accountable.  But I’ll be honest with you, the federal statute that applies is narrow.  In use-of-force cases, federal law requires us to prove both that the officer used “objectively unreasonable” force and that she or he acted willfully – “for the specific purpose of violating the law” – the highest standard of criminal intent in the federal code.  Mistake, misperception, negligence and poor judgment are not prosecutable at the federal level.  That said, during this administration, we have charged more than 580 law enforcement officials for committing willful violations of civil rights and related crimes.

    But we know that the true causes – the real reasons – for unrest run far deeper than any individual incident.  And we know that while public attention to these issues might be new, these causes are long-standing and systemic.  We’ve found these causes time and again through several of the 23 civil pattern-or-practice investigations we’ve opened into local police departments during this administration.  These cases focus not on individuals but on systems.  Broken systems – plagued by unlawful practices and tainted by bias – can devastate a community and corrode public trust, letting down not just the victims of police misconduct but the officers who seek to proudly wear the badge.

    We saw the impact of broken systems in Baltimore, where a “zero tolerance” street enforcement strategy became a quest to produce numbers – pedestrian stops of African Americans in particular – regardless of their limited impact on solving crime and the damage they did to community relationships.  Officers routinely arrested people for loitering or trespassing if they could not provide a “valid reason” for standing on the sidewalk or near a public housing development.  In one instance, a shift commander emailed a template for describing such trespassing arrests.  The template had blank fields.  Except that it had the words “black male” pre-filled for the suspect description.  Blanket assumptions and stereotypes about certain neighborhoods and certain communities led many residents to see the justice system as illegitimate and authorities as corrupt. 

    We saw the impact of broken systems in Ferguson, where the criminalization of poverty – and intentional racial bias in police and court practices – eroded public trust.  The city relied on enforcement strategies “to fill the revenue pipeline” without due consideration for whether officers could better protect the city by focusing on neighborhood policing, rather than debt collection.  We found the city issuing multiple citations with excessive fines and fees for minor violations – $302 for jaywalking, $427 for disturbing the peace and $531 for allowing high grass and weeds to grow on your lawn – and then arresting and even jailing residents when they couldn’t afford to pay.

    We saw the impact of broken systems in New Orleans as well, where officers lacked the ability to effectively communicate with immigrant communities.  At the time of our investigation, the New Orleans Police Department relied primarily on just two officers – one fluent in Spanish and one fluent in Vietnamese – to assist on all service calls and investigations involving limited English proficient residents.  As one Spanish-speaking immigrant testified, “[W]e don’t feel safe, we don’t feel supported.  We, the immigrants don’t feel support from them [the police].  We cannot call them for any kind of problem for help.”

    And we saw the impact of broken systems in Seattle, where the use of excessive force against individuals in crisis left families dealing with mental illness or addiction with nowhere to turn for help, without access to services and too fearful to call the police when the denial of treatment created dangerous situations for themselves and their loved ones.

    While each of these communities struggled with unique problems, the broken systems and police misconduct caused residents to view the police, the courts or even government itself as arbitrary, biased and unfair.  And when residents didn’t trust law enforcement, they became less willing to share information – information critical to solving and preventing crimes.  Entire communities felt that the justice system was not protecting or serving them, perpetuating disillusionment and exacerbating tensions.  Simply put, unconstitutional policing threatens the security and well-being of our communities.  And that hurts us all. 

    Of course, broken systems and unconstitutional policing practices don’t operate in isolation from other inequities in our justice system.  Indeed, throughout the justice system – from arraignment to sentencing – when people experience a two-tiered system of justice that stacks the deck against those living in poverty, these broader failures erodes trust, too.  The entire Department of Justice – including our team at the Office for Access to Justice, led by Director Lisa Foster – has helped lead the charge against criminal justice policies that punish poverty.  We’ve sent a dear colleague letter to state and local judges to help end unlawful fine and fee practices that result in inescapable cycles of debt and incarceration.  We’ve shined a light on the right-to-counsel crisis by filing briefs around the country – arguing that if due to underfunding and high workloads, public defenders can’t meaningfully test the prosecution’s case, that violates the Sixth Amendment.  We’ve taken on the criminalization of homelessness, arguing that because every human being must sleep at some time and in some place, arresting and punishing a person for sleeping in public – when there aren’t enough shelter beds in the city and she has nowhere else to go – criminalizes the status of being homeless.  We’ve addressed unlawful bail practices that result in jailing presumptively innocent people solely because of their poverty, without consideration of their ability to pay or alternatives to incarceration, causing people to lose their jobs, their health benefits or their homes without any benefit to public safety.  As with the issue of systemic police misconduct, addressing these issues – by preventing the punishment of poverty and by ensuring access to justice for all – is critical to restoring and maintaining the public’s faith in the legitimacy of our institutions and the integrity of our democracy.

    The integrity of our democracy also depends on ensuring that every eligible voter can participate in the electoral process.  Voting forms the bedrock of our democracy.  In our democracy, no matter what policy issue we care about most, we get closer to these goals through the ballot box.  The Justice Department works to ensure that every eligible voter enjoys the full range of voting rights protected by federal law.  It makes no difference to us what candidate a voter selects or what party she supports.  But we fight day-in and day-out, in elections big and small, not just in November but throughout the year, to protect her right to have a say.  Even with the severe setback of the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, we’ve continued to use every tool at our disposal, including the Voting Rights Act, to protect voters from discrimination and provide the opportunities federal law guarantees.  And when it comes to protecting the process, we have been winning.

    This year, courts around the country issued pivotal rulings to protect the franchise, including in landmark cases brought by the Justice Department and private plaintiffs in North Carolina and Texas.  In July, a federal appeals court ruled that “because of race, the legislature enacted one of the largest restrictions of the franchise in modern North Carolina history,” striking down a law that “target[s] African Americans with almost surgical precision.”  And after years of litigation prolonged by Shelby County, in July the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down a Texas voter ID law for violating the Voting Rights Act.  Roughly half a million Texans lacked the form of ID needed to vote.  As Sammie Louise Bates – an elderly African American woman living on a fixed income of $321 per month, who lacked the birth certificate she needed to get a Texas ID – testified, “I had to put the $42 [I needed to get the birth certificate] where it was doing the most good … because we couldn’t eat the birth certificate … and we couldn’t pay rent with the birth certificate.”  From Alabama to Connecticut, we’ve also reached critical settlements to ensure that eligible voters can register with the ease and access that federal law requires.

    In the general election last month, the Justice Department sent more than 500 personnel to 67 jurisdictions in 28 states to monitor polling places in the field.  Of course, no matter how vigorously and effectively we protect this most fundamental right – through enforcement and monitoring, with government action and support from private plaintiffs – eligible voters need to go out and exercise it.  Democracy requires active participation.  Self-government, after all, doesn’t happen by chance.  But I recognize that people need to believe in the legitimacy of government – in the guarantee that government will treat them fairly, with dignity and decency – in order to participate in the process.

    Defending the integrity of our democracy also requires protecting all people – no matter who they are, what they look like, whom they love or where they worship – from harm.  Violence against people based on their identity not only violates the law and harms individuals.  It also denies entire communities the promises of equal protection and true freedom.  Following recent heinous acts of terrorism and divisive rhetoric – we’re combating a backlash of religious discrimination targeting Muslim communities and others perceived to be Muslim.  Just two days ago, we convicted a Minneapolis man of a hate crime for writing and mailing a threatening letter to a local Islamic Center, where he threatened to “blow up your building with all you immigrants in it.”  Beyond hate crimes, this discriminatory backlash also includes bullying in schools and unlawful barriers to building houses of worship.

    For the past eight years, the Civil Rights Division has also worked tirelessly to make the promise of equal protection real for gay, lesbian and transgender individuals.  Just last month, we celebrated the seventh anniversary of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.  This law expanded the federal definition of hate crimes to include protections against crimes based on gender, disability, gender identity or sexual orientation.  It marked the first time that the words, “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender” appeared in the United States Code.  It enhanced the legal toolkit available to prosecutors.  And it increased the ability of federal law enforcement to support our state and local partners.  In the years since, the Civil Rights Division has vigorously enforced this landmark statute.  And we continue to work with our partners on the federal, state and local levels to ensure the robust enforcement of hate crime statutes.

    Hate violence may mark the most severe form, but discrimination anywhere – and in any form – offends the Constitution and corrodes the ideals of our democracy.  In United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges, the Justice Department argued successfully that our Constitution guarantees the equal protection of the law to all people.  In citing the Supreme Court’s previous decisions – and in recounting America’s painful history of discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals – we explained that bans on same-sex marriage “exclude a long-mistreated class of human beings from a legal and social status of tremendous import” and are “incompatible with the Constitution.”  And then in June 2015, the Supreme Court agreed, ruling that here in America, our Constitution guarantees all people “equal dignity in the eyes of the law.”  The Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell stands as a beacon of light – not only for gay and lesbian individuals but for the cause of justice itself.

    The cause of justice is never static.  It is always searching for the next barrier to dismantle, for the next right to vindicate and for the next freedom to secure.  Earlier this year, I joined Attorney General [Loretta] Lynch to announce our lawsuit against North Carolina for violating the civil rights of transgender individuals.  Just like Obergefell was about more than just marriage, our challenge to H.B. 2 was about more than just bathrooms.  Justice [Anthony] Kennedy wrote in Obergefell that gay men and women have a right to “dignity in their own distinct identity.”  And, in 1964, in a case vindicating the Justice Department’s efforts to enforce the Civil Rights Act against the Heart of Atlanta Motel, which refused to let African Americans use its facilities, Justice [Arthur] Goldberg wrote that the “primary purpose” of our nation’s antidiscrimination laws “is the vindication of human dignity.”  Laws like H.B. 2 force transgender people to choose between their dignity and basic participation in public life.  The humiliation, frustration and embarrassment transgender people feel when they are denied access to a facility others of their gender are free to use – when they receive the message that they are less worthy of equal status and dignity than their peers – is the pain of discrimination and always has been.  Fighting discrimination is the mission of the Civil Rights Division, and it always has been. 

    In all of the areas I spoke about today, we – as a nation and as a people – have far more work to do.  Whether it’s in North Carolina or in countless other places across America – from rural towns to large states – this fight is centered around the cause of hope.  To me, civil rights work has always been built upon a foundation of hope.  It’s the hope that despite the zigs and the zags of our nation’s history, we have been marching forward, imperfectly yet inexorably.  The long struggle for equal justice and equal opportunity in this country has always required a deep and abiding reservoir of hope.  Hope gives us the struggle and the struggle gives us hope.  It’s the hope that this work transforms the nation, fulfills dreams and changes lives.

    While we will face new and emerging challenges to equality in the days ahead – just as we always have – civil rights work has always been designed to endure, to build new, infectious momentum in both public and private action.  And when I look at the distinguished leaders in this room, I know that with your determination, your creativity and your compassion, together we will continue to advance America’s march for progress and quest for justice.  Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at the Dedication of Ariel Rios Federal Building

    Source: United States Attorneys General 13

    Remarks as prepared for delivery

    Thank you, Deputy Director Thomas Brandon, for that kind introduction, and for your outstanding leadership of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).  I also want to acknowledge my colleagues from across the Department of Justice who are here today, as well as the many current and former federal and local law enforcement officers and members of the armed forces who have taken the time to join us.  And, of course, I want to thank the family of Special Agent Ariel Rios – especially his wife, Elsie, his son Frank and so many other members of the Rios family.  You honor us all with your presence.

    We are here today to rename a building.  But more importantly, we are here to honor a man.  Thanks to the tireless efforts of lawmakers, law enforcement officers, and members of the public, the headquarters of ATF will once again bear the name of Special Agent Ariel Rios. 

    This is as it should be.  In an agency known for bravery and dedication – and in the rich history of the Department of Justice – Special Agent Rios stands out for his intrepid courage, total selflessness, and steadfast integrity.  At the age of just 27, he accepted an assignment as an undercover narcotics agent in south Florida, subjecting himself to extreme stress and harrowing danger on a daily basis.  Those of you who have done undercover work know the stress, the danger, the loneliness of the work as well as the strain it places on one’s family.  Ariel Rios did that work and did it well.  He did not do it for reward or recognition – or even to have a building named after him, but because he believed in the cause of justice, a cause that he served with commitment and skill.  When he saw the challenges facing South Florida at that time and learned the task force was seeking agents, he joined, because he knew he had the skill, the experience and the judgment needed – but more importantly because he knew that he could help.  It is especially fitting that we are here on Dec. 2, because it was 34 years ago today that Special Agent Rios gave his life for that cause, when he and his partner, Special Agent Alex D’Atri, were executing an undercover operation in Miami.  Special Agent D’Atri suffered serious wounds in that operation, but he survived.  He is here with us today, and I ask all of you to join me in recognizing his valor and heroism. 

    This is the second ATF headquarters building to be named for Special Agent Rios.  By consecrating this site in his memory, we give public expression to our private feelings: our gratitude for his service; our admiration for his bravery; and our awe at his sacrifice.  The granite and steel within this foundation symbolizes his strength and determination.  The soaring glass of the atrium echoes his open heart and generous soul.  And the public-facing sign we will soon dedicate illustrates his commitment to the protection of the American people.  With this building naming today, we ensure that future generations of ATF agents and employees will be inspired by the life and example of Special Agent Ariel Rios.  And we show our determination to continue the work for which he gave his life. 

    Ultimately, that work is the most fitting memorial we can offer to the memory of Ariel Rios.  Naming this building in his honor is indeed a high tribute, but the memory of Ariel Rios lives on not simply in a structure, but in his enduring spirit – a spirit of devotion to duty; service to others; and fidelity to the law.  That spirit animated Ariel Rios in life, and it led him to keep his oath unto death.  It represents the highest aspiration of our profession – the standard by which law enforcement officers measure themselves each and every day.  And so, on this solemn occasion, let we who are gathered here today resolve to honor the memory of Special Agent Rios not only by bestowing his name upon this building, but by emulating his spirit in our work.  Let us reaffirm our commitment to the ideals he served so well.  And let us continue to build the more just, the more peaceful – the more perfect – union for which he gave his life.

    May God bless the memory of Special Agent Ariel Rios, and shelter his family in his everlasting grace.  May He bless all the fallen in our law enforcement family and protect all those who continue to serve.  And may He continue to bless the United States of America.    

    MIL Security OSI