Free Republic

Leaders of former President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) have already landed gigs at prominent universities. Officials behind the Biden DOJ’s most controversial actions — including leveraging the law to push abortion and prosecute pro-life activists, investigating President Donald Trump and advancing left-wing activist causes through litigation — quickly made the jump to teaching law students. Former Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Kristen Clarke will join Penn Carey Law to teach a federal civil rights law bootcamp during the spring semester, according to a Feb. 10 news release. She is also joining the Howard University School of Law...

The Biden-Harris Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday requested the U.S. Supreme Court “deny” Republicans’ bid to enforce an Arizona law requiring individuals to prove they’re U.S. citizens when registering and voting in elections.Arguing on behalf of the administration, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar requested that the nation’s highest court instead allow a lower court decision — one prohibiting the implementation of provisions of the statute in question — to remain in effect for the November election.As The Federalist previously reported, the 2022 law mandated residents to show documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) when registering via state voter registration forms....

by Julie KellyAs I noted yesterday, Elizabeth Prelogar totally misrepresented (lied?) how DOJ routinely handles sentencing requests for those convicted of 1512c2. Under questioning from Kavanaugh about prison sentences, Prelogar tried to make it sound like 1512c2 defendants with other nonviolent offenses (common misdemeanors) only get about 24 months in jail. She quickly mentioned the "Brock" case--referring to Larry Brock, a man from Texas convicted at bench trial of 1512c2 and 5 misdemeanors--and the "enhancement" recently overturned by DC appellate court in 1512c2 convictions. So what did DOJ ask for in Brock case? Not 24-26 months as Prelogar attempted to...

On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot. The court's ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump. Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making. Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch posed a question that was epic, to...

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in Fischer v. United States and at issue is statute 18 USC §1512(c)(2): Whoever corruptly— (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on Fischer v United...

The Department of Injustice (DOJ) is using a statute called “obstructed a Congressional proceeding” to prosecute hundreds of these protesters simply for exercising their First Amendment rights. This statute is a serious felony with the potential of 20 years behind bars. CNN notes that this case also has implications for President Donald Trump, who was charged by corrupt special counsel Jack Smith for exercising his First Amendment rights on that fateful day. Justice Neil Gorsuch stole the show this morning by blowing up the foundation of the DOJ’s case against the nonviolent J6 protesters. While the Trump supporters simply exercised...

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court oral arguments in a key immigration case grew heated Tuesday as Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Biden’s first nominee to the court, rejected the White House’s interpretation of federal law. Jackson accused Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar of having a “conceptual problem” in her understanding of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires the federal bureaucracy to take certain steps when changing policies. The case, brought by Texas and Louisiana, challenges Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ 2021 memo that said federal agents should review the “totality” of an illegal immigrant’s threat to public safety rather than automatically expel...

The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to cancel coming oral arguments on two pillars of former President Donald Trump’s immigration policy, construction of a wall along the southern U.S. border and the “Remain in Mexico” program that barred U.S. entry to many asylum applicants while their cases were considered. The filings are among the first of many the Justice Department is expected to make as the Biden administration changes direction on immigration, LGBT protections, voting rights, the Affordable Care Act and other policies. In both cases, acting Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who represents the federal government at...

We have the names and backgrounds of 15 of the 17 attorneys working in the special counsel's office.