DOJ Review Alleges Biased Enforcement Of FACE Act Under Biden Administration
A sweeping internal review by the U.S. Department of Justice has raised serious questions about how federal law was enforced during the administration of Joe Biden, particularly in cases involving pro-life activists.
The nearly 900-page report, compiled after examining hundreds of thousands of records, focused on prosecutions under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. The law is designed to protect access to abortion clinics, religious institutions, and pregnancy centers. According to the review, enforcement during that period showed signs of imbalance, with pro-life defendants allegedly facing more aggressive legal tactics and harsher sentencing recommendations.
The report claims that prosecutors at times coordinated closely with advocacy organizations, including Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the National Abortion Federation, sharing information and relying on referrals to initiate investigations. Internal communications cited in the review suggest some cases were monitored for extended periods before charges were filed.
One case highlighted in the report involved Mark Houck, who was arrested in 2022 and charged under the FACE Act. He was later acquitted by a federal jury. The report also raised concerns about prosecutorial conduct in jury selection and internal discussions about defendants’ religious beliefs.
Statistical findings included in the review suggest that prosecutors sought longer prison sentences on average for pro-life defendants compared to pro-abortion defendants charged under similar statutes. The report also alleges that, in some instances, evidence handling and disclosure practices were problematic.
Todd Blanche said the findings underscore the need to restore impartiality within the department. He stated that the DOJ would not tolerate selective enforcement based on political or ideological viewpoints.
The review could lead to further action, including internal disciplinary measures or referrals to outside authorities for additional investigation. Officials indicated that some personnel involved in the cases examined have already departed or are under review.
The findings are likely to fuel ongoing debate over the role of federal law enforcement in politically sensitive cases, particularly those involving abortion-related activism and First Amendment concerns.