In a second report detailing the Biden administration’s Stalinist ideological war against Americans, President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice exposed Joe Biden’s DOJ attacks on parents who criticized local officials at school board meetings.
A previous department report exposed the Biden DOJ’s attack on traditionalist Catholics. It labeled them as potential domestic terrorists.
The latest — The 2026 Report to Expose the Weaponization of Government Against Parents in Schools — details something similar. After the far-left National School Boards Association (NSBA) complained to Biden’s DOJ that angry parents were exercising their free-speech rights at school board meetings, then-Attorney General Merrick Garland sicced the FBI on the concerned people.
NSBA Letter
As the report explains, NSBA published a letter on September 29, 2021 that “demanded that President Biden direct federal action against parents and others who were allegedly threatening school board members.”
NSBA falsely claimed that such angry parents at school board meetings were an “immediate threat” to government schools and the bureaucrats who run them.
“And it urged the federal government to treat those parents’ actions as potentially ‘equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism,’” the report notes.
Among the letter’s many problems is that NSBA “labeled numerous instances of constitutionally protected speech and protest as ‘threats,’” the report continues:
One example involved “an individual yell[ing] a Nazi salute in protest to masking requirements;” another involved an individual who was opposing critical-race theory. The NSBA claimed that school boards faced “angry mobs” or were “disrupted,” but the now-disavowed letter could only point to one example of a person being prosecuted for being violent and one other instance where it claimed “a third person was hurt.” Other examples included an individual calling school administrators; groups “posting watchlists” and “spreading” what the NSBA claimed was “misinformation;” correspondence to school boards; and people making strongly worded statements at public meetings protesting school policies. That speech, the NSBA said, was “equivalent to a form of a domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” [Emphasis in original.]
The letter also cherry-picked “examples that were atypical and presented a skewed picture of parental activity nationwide.”
NSBA expected the feds to treat protected speech as “criminal.” So it “requested ‘appropriate enforceable actions against’ those parents, including potentially prosecuting parents who protested school board activities as engaging in ‘domestic terrorism.’”
The report also details the ordeal of Loudoun County parent Scott Smith. A “gender-fluid” student raped his daughter in a bathroom at school. NSBA labeled Smith a potential terrorist because he challenged Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler’s statement that he knew nothing about such a crime.
“When Mr. Smith challenged this claim at the school board meeting, he was arrested and prosecuted — and his prosecution only ended after he received a gubernatorial pardon,” the report notes:
On October 21, 2021, the predator transgender student who had brutally attacked Mr. Smith’s disabled daughter was convicted of sexual battery and forcible sodomy.
The family sued the school system in 2023 for $30 million.
The DOJ Response
DOJ officials collaborated with NSBA to produce the letter and the Garland memo that followed.
That memo posits a “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against school employees. Garland wrote that the “Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.” Then came the threat of an FBI crackdown on dissident parents:
Coordination and partnership with local law enforcement is critical to implementing these measures for the benefit of our nation’s nearly 14,000 public school districts. To this end, I am directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation, working with each United States Attorney, to convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days of the issuance of this memorandum. These meetings will facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.
“Simply put, the Garland Memorandum was an outgrowth of the NSBA Letter — a letter, to reiterate, that labeled parental speech protesting school board policies as potentially involving, among other things, domestic terrorism, hate crimes, or conspiracies to violate individuals’ rights, which are all subject to criminal prosecution under federal law,” the DOJ report avers.
Internal Opposition, Response
One of the DOJ’s anti-parent officials was Chip Slaven, the report says. He wrote an email that echoed the NSBA letters and strongly suggested a crackdown on parents, including using the Patriot Act or hate-crime laws to prosecute them. But lawyers in the office of the deputy attorney general “were concerned about the request for federal intervention and did not view the conduct identified in Slaven’s email as involving criminal activity,” the report explains.
And “as they continued to struggle to identify an appropriate way for the Department of Justice to be involved, one attorney said, ‘This is ridiculous.’”
Criticism regardless, “the Garland Memorandum resulted in investigations of parents.” Answering the House Judiciary Committee, “the FBI acknowledged that it ultimately opened twenty-five ‘Guardian assessments’ of school board threats.”
A whistleblower disclosed that the FBI investigated a mother because she belonged to a “right-wing mom’s group” and “is a gun owner” and a father because “he rail[ed] against the government.”
DOJ will take the following steps to address the attack on parents:
- Permit parents to review the FBI’s “Guardian” files;
- Add disclaimers to those files;
- Determine if the FBI or DOJ violated anyone’s rights;
- Provide a grant “to inform school employees regarding the rights of parents in our primary and secondary educational system”; and,
- Provide money for more “resources and training to schoolteachers and staff about the First Amendment rights of parents and the rights of parents to direct and guide the upbringing and education of their children.”
