>> the sub-committee will come

to order. without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. we welcome everyone to today's hearing on the department of justice civil rights division. with that, we will have the pledge of allegiance. will the gentleman from arizona lead us in the pledge of

allegiance? our colleague, mr. biggs marzano will be able to participate in the hearing today for the purpose of questioning the witness. if a member yields him time for that purpose, i will now recognize myself for an opening statement.

thank our witness for being here today. the civil rights division is responsible for the enforcement of civil rights statutes enacted by congress and related constitutional guarantees. this is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. i too, in a previous life served in the department of justice, having served as special assistant united states attorney in the eastern district of texas. my job there as the witness and my colleagues know is to equally enforce the law. my grandfather was the chief of police in sweetwater texas. his job was to equally enforce the law. my grandmother was the first woman elected county clerk in nolan county, texas after my grandfather passed away from cancer. when my dad was seven years old, his job was to equally enforce the law justice is blind and we must follow the facts wherever they may take us like all components of the justice department. the civil rights division is expected to do the same equally enforce the law. unfortunately, under the biden administration, this has not always been the case. civil rights division has fixed its sight, for example, on those charged with protecting us. police departments often harassing these departments to the point that they cannot do their jobs. there have been a series of investigations, minneapolis, louisville, phoenix, mount vernon, new york, louisiana state police, new york city police department, special victims division, maryland department of state police, worcester,chusetts police department, memphis police trenton, new jersey, lexington, mississippi 11 times. over the last two years, we've

seen a significant disparity. there are just a few examples of how the doj civil rights division has targeted those who protect our communities. it's not to say there are not circumstances meriting review but in the midst of rising crime , plummeting police recruiting , open borders, mountains of fentanyl. doj is prioritizing investigations with small to mid size these departments. under president biden doj has opened 11 pattern or practice investigations in the police departments throughout the country compared to just one under the previous administration. this combined with fairly radical views that we'll talk about with the witness earlier about defunding the police in the past, which raises concerns about the intent of such investigations, especially at a time when police are demoralized , following the defund the police movement and crime wave that is followed. the division's activities have also too often amounted to using the law to advantage or disadvantage certain states and individuals. for example, the freedom of access to clinic entrances or face act prohibits threats of force obstruction of property damage intended to interfere with the reproductive health care services. this law protects abortion clinics, pregnancy resource

centers and houses of worship alike. however, the divisions of prosecutions under the face act show a significant bias toward prosecuting face act violations involving abortion clinics, particularly a situation involving mark ha who was charged under the face act for protecting his young son from a belligerent abortion activist, on may 2nd 2022 a draft copy of the supreme court's decision in dobbs v. jackson women's health organization was leaked to the press. this leak gave rise to widespread demonstrations and attacks on pro-life facilities. in fact, following the leak, more than 100 pro-life facilities were vandalized or damaged including by arson. 218 catholic churches have been attacked since the dobbs decision was leaked according to catholic vote. according to the family research council, there are 57 pro a acts of hostility against churches from january 22 to september 22. and in the first quarter of 23 of fiscal 23 there were 69 incidents of hostility toward churches.

in the face of this increase, you would expect the civil rights division to step up and protect the civil rights of these americans. but there was not. in 2022 the department brought 26 prosecutions under the face act. all of them involved alleged incidents at abortion clinics. in 23 the department has identified for the committee, one prosecution of four individuals in florida who spray painted threats on pregnancy resource centers in the state. this marked the first time in american history that the face act was used against pro abortion protesters. this questionable use of resources is further illustrated by other activities of the division. in 2021, the department began a lawsuit against the state of georgia alleging a new election law was enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of black georgians to vote on account of their race or color. the problem is that's just not true, and the court's decisions in that case today to borne that out. recently, the court refused to block several provisions of the law while the litigation continues. notably, the court found that the department has not shown that any of the provisions have a disparate impact on black voters. quite simply the facts on the ground do not match the

allegations in the department's lawsuit. while the department is devoting resources to this politically motivated lawsuit is missing in action when constitutional rights are violated. in september of this year, new mexico governor michelle lujan grisham issued a public health order banning the otherwise lawful carrying of firearms in certain jurisdictions in the state. this order was plainly unconstitutional under the second and 14th amendments int'. despite this plain violation of american rights, the civil rights division was nowhere to be found. an advocacy group, not the department had to bring a lawsuit to overturn the order. the division failed to file an amicus brief or even a statement of interest to protect americans second amendment rights. more recently, the civil rights department appears to be standing idly by while jewish americans have their civil rights violated by radical pro palestinian protesters since hamas's cowardly october 7th attack in which it murdered innocent israelis, women and kidnapped babies. rampant anti semitism has reared its ugly head on american college campuses and throughout

major american cities. just this weekend, pro palestinian protesters in philadelphia protested outside of goldie, a jewish owned falafel restaurant with a location less than a mile away from independence hall where the declaration of independence was signed. the division must return to the nonpartisan work of protecting the rights of all americans. i would note that there is an ongoing list of anti semitic threats and violence throughout the west, anti semite spray montreal jewish schools and bullets attack some aipac president's home in l a investigated as hate crime. burbank police search for a suspect that spray painted schwa -- swastika on synagogue benon hell jewish center at the university of florida vandalized with anti-semitic graffiti. cornell cancels classes after a student arrested for anti semitic threats of murder and rape. fbi investigating after synagogue desig with anti-israel anti semitic graffiti. that's eight of literally pages of examples of anti semitic acts in the wake of october 7th. and it is notable that there has been basically silence.

so it is true, the division must return to the nonpartisan work of protecting the rights of all americans, not just those that it favors, i look forward to hearing this morning how that will happen. i will now recognize the ranking member, the gentlewoman from pennsylvania ms. scanlon for her opening statement. >> thank you. assistant attorney general clark, i want to welcome you to the judiciary committee and this very important oversight hearing to help the committee and the american public understand the critical role that the civil rights division of the department of justice plays in protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of all americans. this hearing is particularly important since your predecessor refused the committee's request for an oversight hearing amidst the trump administration's efforts to weaponize the department of justice in a way that was unprecedented in the history of this great nation. under that administration, we saw members of the department of justice leadership, acting as the president's personal personal attorneys, repeating election disinformation,

withdrawing support for voting rights and other civil rights enforcement. and reversing course on decades of work to ensure that law enforcement agencies protect the rights of all americans. and of course, under that administration, we saw the normalization of hate speech, chaos and political violence, which is tearing apart so many of our communities today. that's why it's so important that we understand the critical role of the department of justice's civil rights division in combating civil rights violations and securing our fundamental freedoms and what congress needs to do to support that mission at this time. it's worth remembering that congress explicitly created the civil rights division as part of the civil rights act of 1957 to protect the voting rights of black americans and other minorities. the very genesis of the civil rights division was rooted in the federal effort to protect voting rights and reflected the belief that in a democracy, the right to vote is the foundation upon which all other rights and freedoms ultimately rest. these core civil rights and freedoms include the right to cast a vote in a free and fair

election regardless of race, the right to be free from discrimination in employment, housing, and education, and the right to be free from violence based on hate. and i look forward to how the civil rights division has renewed its commitment to these principles under its current leadership. under the trump administration, we saw the civil rights division abdicate its responsibility to enforce many voting rights and other civil rights protections. so i'm heartened to see a renewed focus by the division on vigorous civil rights enforcement. understanding that the right to cast a vote in a free and fair election is the foundation of all other rights. i appreciate the division's renewed focus on voting rights , taking action in over 40 voting rights matters since january 2021 ranging from voting related enforcement actions to filing statements of interest in numerous private enforcement actions including two in pennsylvania. but we continue to need vigorous enforcement of the voting rights act as we've seen a tsunami of restrictive voting laws enacted by states over the past three

years with the potential to impact the 2024 election. of course, much of this legislative activity stems from the supreme court's erosion of the voting rights act of 1965 through a series of decisions beginning with shelby county versus holder and continuing with bravano. bravanovich versus democratic national committee. these decisions have made it harder and more resource intensive for of the civil rights division and other voting rights act plaintiffs to prevail in enforcement actions. but there is a solution, of course, that is that congress must act. congress must respond to these misguided decisions by reauthorizing the voting rights act and updating the guardrails of our democratic republic to respond to 21st century threats. we must pass the john r. lewis voting rights advancement act, which would reinvigorate the voting rights act and ensure full funding for the civil rights division to deploy more resources to enforce voting rights protections. the civil rights division also bears responsibility for

enforcing federal hate crime laws. at a time when over the past seven years, we've seen an explosion of hate speech and political violence, whether directed towards racial or ethnic minorities, women and lgbtq plus persons or members of religious groups, all across the country. communities have been impacted by hate incidents as they've trended upwards. statistics compiled by the fbi show that last year even with imperfect reporting, law enforcement agencies reported over 11,000 hate crime incidents, over 59% of those victims were targeted because of their race or ethnicity. another 17.3% were targeted based on their religion and another 17% were targeted because of their sexual orientation. of course, in the charged environment surrounding hamas' terrorist attack on october 7th and israelis, israel's military response to the attack. we've seen increasing reports of anti semitism and islamophobia , including incidents of potential hate crimes.

also for decades, the civil rights division has played an important role in helping law enforcement agencies to keep their communities safe and uphold the rule of law while protecting the civil rights of all citizens. one of the tools for doing this is to work with communities to address patterns and practices of violations in law enforcement, a tool that was abandoned by the trump department of justice. and i look forward to hearing what progress has been made in this area again. thank you, assistant attorney general clark for being with us and updating us on the work of the division and what congress needs to do to assist the division in that work. thank you. i yield back. >> i now recognize the ranking member of the full committee. mr nadler for his opening statement should he care to get going. >> thank you, mr chairman. i would like to begin by thanking hisistant attorney -- assistant general kristen clark for appearing before the sub-committee today. unfortunately it has been several years since we have had the opportunity to question the

head of the department of civil rights division, department of justice civil rights division because general clark's immediate predecessor during the trump administration never appeared before us. in a sense, i don't blame the department for its eva evasion at the time because back then, it had nothing good to report to us as it practically abdicated its responsibility to vigorously enforce our nation's critical civil rights laws. i'm pleased however, that under the biden administration and under assistant attorney general clark's leadership, the division is once again taking its role seriously. that means protecting americans from a nationwide effort to undermine the right to vote, working with local communities to investigate and resolve patterns and practices of unconstitutional conduct in law enforcement agencies, addressing the disturbing rise in hate crimes across the country and combating discrimination in all forms, whether it be in employment, housing, education or elsewhere. on all of these critical issues and many others that impact

millions of americans, the dedicated staff of the civil rights division works tirelessly to ensure that all americans regardless of their race, religion, national origin , disability or sexual orientation are treated equally under the law. thank you for your efforts in leading this vital department. excuse me. and top of mind for me today is the recent rise in anti semitism and the general rise in hate crimes and other forms of illegal discrimination that has transpired over the past several years. according to the most recent data compiled by the fbi for the year 2022 and the testimony of federal law enforcement officials, there's been a significant documented increase in antisemitic hate crimes and discrimination. according to fbi data, even before hamas brutal terrorist attack on october 7th, antisemitism was on the rise. in 2022, there were 2042 reported incidents based on religion and more than half of

these were driven by anti jewish bias. during recent testimony before the senate fbi director christopher wray stated that the threat of anti-semitism quote is reaching in some way sort of historic levels and that that was in part because the jewish community is targeted by terrorists really across the spectrum, including foreign terrorist organizations and domestic violent terrorist extremists. director wray went on to say that the fbi statistics would indicate that for a group that represents only about 2.4% of the american public, jewish americans account for something like 60% of all religious based hate crimes, but it is not just the jewish community that is experiencing a rise in hate in the weeks since the october 7th attacks, there have been tragic incidents of islamophobia and anti arab hate across the country, including the recent shooting of three palestinian american students in vermont and the murder of a six year old muslim child in illinois. and unfortunately, hate crimes rooted in race, ethnicity or ancestry continue to remain the most common.

according to that same fbi data, there were 6557 reported race motivated incidents in 2022. and the number of anti-black incidents was more than three times higher than the next highest racial or ethnic category. additionally, fbi data also shows a disturbing trend of increasing instances of violence against the transgender and gender non conforming community. as we all know, while statistics can help us quantify and understand the magnitude of the problem, they cannot fully convey the damage that bias motivated crimes inflict upon our communities. general clark, i cannot emphasize enough how vulnerable the jewish community in america is feeling at this moment especially now that the october , 7th attack appears to have led to an explosive rise in anti-semitism, both at home and abroad. and they know without a doubt that every other community i just mentioned shares that same

sense of vulnerability following similar hate motivated crimes. if unaddressed, hate crimes send the message to every member of a community that you are not a real person and therefore are undeserving of the law's protection. addressing that feeling of vulnerability is of course the point of hate crimes enforcement to provide not only justice for the victim but for the entire community. so i'm heartened to hear that under your leadership, the civil rights division has brought over 100 hate crime related cases and secured numerous convictions , including against the perpetrators of the attacks in buffalo, pittsburgh, and el paso. that is why i also believe it is crucial for congress to provide sufficient tools and resources to the civil rights division so that it can effectively address this rise in hate as well as to carry out its mission to remedy illegal discrimination in voting, employment, education, public accommodations and government funded programs and services.

in that vein, if i may general clark, i would offer a few words of advice to you and to those members of the public who may be following today's hearing. don't be distracted by the republican sideshow, fueled by their conspiracy minded allies in their conservative media echo chamber of which we have already heard a preview today. under your leadership, the civil rights division is properly focused on the enforcement of rights that are essential to the functioning of our diverse democratic society. after all, if you can be attacked with impunity because of your religion, denied the right to vote because of your race, fired from your job because of your sex, or prohibited from receiving an education because you are transgender, the fundamental rights and values enshrined in the constitution are not worth the paper they are written on. i look forward to our distinguished witnesses testimony and i yield back the balance of my time. >> i thank the ranking member for his statement. without objection, all other

opening statements will be included in the record. we will now introduce today's witness. the honorable kristen clark, ms. clark is the assistant attorney general for civil rights. she was sworn in on may 25th, 2021. we welcome our witness and thank her for appearing today. we will begin by swearing you in. would you please rise and raise your right hand? do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief. so help you god. >> i do. >> thank you. let the record reflect that the witness has answered in the affirmative. please note that your written testimony will be entered into the record in its entirety accordingly. we ask that you summarize your testimony. ms. clark, you may begin. >> thank you. good morning, chairman roy, ranking member, scanlon, uh ranking member, nadler and distinguished members of this subcomittee. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. protecting civil rights is essential to the department of justice.

in fact, the department was created in 1870 in part to confront the ku klux klan and others who used terror and violence to prevent black people from exercising their civil and constitutional rights. nearly 100 years later, congress gave new energy to this work by enacting legislation that established the civil rights division and empowered it to protect the civil rights of every person in america. our work remains vital as we continue sadly, to see acts of bigotry, violence, and discrimination in many aspects of life. the division combats these harms by enforcing the constitution and the protections enshrined in law by congress. we work to ensure that every eligible american has voice in our democracy by confronting voting discrimination and we

work to advance equal opportunity in employment, housing, education and more. we safeguard the rights of people with disabilities and we defend the civil rights of those who defend our nation in the armed forces both past and present. we work to vindicate the rights of sexual assault survivors and people who experience sexual harassment on campuses and workplaces, in housing and in jails and prisons. we work to ensure that law enforcement personnel carry out their jobs lawfully and without bias. this work includes prosecutions of officers who abuse their power, including officers tied to the tragic deaths of george floyd in minneapolis, brianna taylor in louisville and tyree nichols in memphis. work that has particular urgency today is our response to bias motivated violence.

fbi data show that reported hate crimes are at the highest level in more than a decade. black people remain the group most frequently targeted by hate crimes, and crimes motivated by anti semitism, islamophobia and bias against the victim's sexual orientation or gender identity have also climbed in number in the weeks following the devastating october 7th attacks in israel and ensuing violence in the middle east. we've seen an alarming rise in acts of hate in our neighborhoods, on our campuses, and in our streets. we know that too many communities are living in fear and we've all seen the horrors that result from hate. the charleston nine, the el paso 23, the tree of life 11, the buffalo 10, the club q five, the jacksonville three.

each of these tragedies offers a bleak testament to the death, pain and trauma that can flow from bigotry and hatred. and so the division's top priority is to investigate and prosecute unlawful acts of hate. since january of 2021, the division has charged more than 105 defendants in more than 95 cases for committing hate crimes. and during that same period, we obtained more than 90 convictions. for example, the division secured a guilty verdict against the man who killed 11 people and critically wounded seven others at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh. the division also secured a conviction of the man who killed 23 and wounded 22 more at a walmart in el paso, texas victims targeted because of their hispanic identity. and we secured convictions of the three men responsible for the racially motivated killing

of ahmaud arbery in georgia. hate crimes are message crimes. the perpetrators not only target their direct victims but also seek to instill fear in the victim's community. but our prosecutions send a louder and more powerful message that hate crimes will not be tolerated in our democracy. that perpetrators will be punished and held accountable , and that the communities targeted will be safeguarded by the federal government. as i close, i want to recognize the hundreds of dedicated public servants in the civil rights division who carry out this critical work. their commitment inspires me each day and i'm honored to represent them here today. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, ms. clark. we will now proceed under the five minute rule with questions. the chair will recognize myself for five minutes.

ms. clark, in a june 2020 op ed, you wrote quote, i advocate for defunding policing operations that have made african americans more vulnerable to police violence and contributed to mass incarceration while investing more in programs and police policies that address critical community needs. since that time in summer of 2020 there have been significant drops in recruiting police nationwide, significant evidence of morale dropping for our police officers and communities across the country. simple statement, do you stand behind that statement in the op ed that you wrote in the summer of 2020 advocating quote for defunding police policing operations. >> microphone, ma'am. >> the justice department fully supports funding and supporting our law enforcement. >> but my question was different than that.

i mean, you penned it and you are the head of the civil rights division and you penned the op ed in the summer of 2020 in the middle, in the midst of significant unrest around the country where our law enforcement community was dealing with significant attacks on them. and you wrote, i advocate for defunding policing operations. do you stand by that statement? >> i've not advocated for defunding law enforcement at the justice department. we allocate millions of dollars by way of our office of justice programs, cops office, office of violence against women. >> the time to answer on the question. the question is just simple. you wrote that statement. do you stand behind that statement or do you now repudiate that statement. >> i have not advocated for defunding law enforcement , chairman and i appreciate the difficult jobs that our law enforcement officers do each day to keep us safe and believe it's important that they have the resources to carry out their jobs. >> well, importantly, black americans make up 36% of violent crime victims, but only 14% of the population.

do you think defunding the police as you wrote in an op ed in june of 2020? it's in writing. do you think defunding the police makes african americans black community more vulnerable to violence? >> i support ensuring that law enforcement have the resources and support needed to carry out their jobs. public safety is a top priority for all of us. >> i would note that the city of austin and the travis county da's office sent you a joint letter just i think yesterday or maybe the day before announcing that 17 of the 21 austin police department officers indicted for alleged excessive force violations between may 29th and may 31 in that summer of unrest were cleared. we had 17 law -- law enforcement officers who were indicted by the local da and then they were suddenly clear, but then they sent a letter the same day requesting that the doj civil rights division investigate the austin police departments. despite the fact, the austin police department had been a model for the department of

justice how to engage in the use of force. my question for you is will you investigate the district attorney for having indicted 17 police officers and then suddenly walking away for a political safe phasing rather than investigating the police department. >> i'm not aware of that correspondence. i'm happy to look into this matter. >> i would look forward to working with your office to do that. it is extraordinarily concerning. in your written testimony, you mentioned the doj has prosecuted face act violations involving both abortion providers and pregnancy resource centers. can you tell us how many face act cases have been filed since it was enacted in 1994? >> so the freedom of access to clinic entrances act is an important law. we apply it evenhanded. i don't have statistics on the number of cases since the law's passage. >> would it surprise you that

the data i have says that it's been brought 130 times since 1994. because then my question is, is how many face act cases have been filed in defense of abortion providers or in defense of pro-abortion activists versus how many face act cases have been filed in defense of pro-life americans or churches that have been attacked? and i wonder if you know the date on those? >> well, i believe uh in outreach and have been aggressively conducting outreach to all groups so that the public understands that the face act applies to both pro-choice and pro-life groups. and i will flag for you, chairman, that we recently had january in against two florida residents for spray painting threats on pregnancy resource -- resource centers. >> and i certainly, i certainly appreciate that you all did that. but the numbers i have are out of 130 uses of the face act

since 1994 126 were for pro abortion activists and for in defense of abortion providers and four have been for pro-life americans and, or churches. and i think that was one of them in january. i'd let you respond to that and then i am out of time. >> while i can't speak to what happened in prior administrations. what i can assure you is that the division is committed to full and evenhanded enforcement of this important federal law. >> thank you, ms. clark. mr. cohen. >> thank you for coming before this committee and thank you for your work and dedication to seeing that the constitution is properly protected and that people are given the rights that are extended there from. can you tell me some of the things that you have done and the justice department has done to improve city's capacities to

fight crime, which is a serious issue in this country today and particularly in my city, memphis, tennessee. >> yes. thank you for the question. congressman, public safety is an important priority for the justice department and for our attorney general. my colleagues in the criminal division, a sister component recently launched an initiative in your city of memphis to deal with violent crime while i can't speak to that initiative. what i can assure you is that this justice department is committed to partnering and working with jurisdictions and officials to ensure public safety. >> and that's a national program that started in houston. it's going to go to other cities as well. >> i believe that's correct. >> thank you. and i appreciate memphis being in a red state. you're coming and helping us with this great problem. civil rights enforcement and the voting rights act and the americans with disabilities are three of my major issues. what exactly is the department of justice doing to enforce the voting rights act? i know we've seen some actions in alabama and in louisiana and maybe in another one of the southern states.

what have they done there and on disability rights as well. >> so, congressman, i started off my career at the justice department as a voting rights lawyer. and what i can assure you is that the civil rights division remains steadfast in ensuring that we're using the voting rights act, national voter registration act, help america vote act. the uniformed and overseas citizens absentee voting act to ensure that every eligible american has voiced in our democracy. we're filing lawsuits. we are filing statements of interest in third-party lawsuits to help guide the courts on the appropriate interpretation and application of the law. we're issuing guidance documents and more, but we are without one of our most powerful tools given the suspension of the section five preclearance provision following the shelby county alabama versus holder ruling. >> and don disabilities? >> enforcement of the ada is a

hallmark of our work in the civil rights division. every day, we're working to ensure that people with disabilities have access to jobs , housing. and we're also very mindful of the barriers that people face when comes to web access. and so again, through litigation, through guidance, through technical assistance and providing service to the public by way of ada.gov and more, we are fighting to stand up for people with disabilities across our country. >> that's so important to give everybody an opportunity to have a full life and not to have some accident of nature or disease being an impediment to that. then the justice department's actions are great. section five was eliminated by the supreme court. section two is alive and it has been used and used well, even though sometimes it's late and it takes time. now there's a argument in the eighth circuit where they ruled that only the government can

bring a case under section two of the voting rights act have most of the cases that have been brought under section been two brought by individuals or by the government? and if it does come out that that is upheld by the supreme court or rule that it's a proper interpretation of the voting rights act and the constitution, what will that do to the voting rights enforcement in your >> -- enforcement in your division? while the justice department takes seriously its obligation to enforce section two. no doubt, private parties, nonpartisan organizations have played a central role. supreme court precedent, legislative history and decades of work in the courts have long made clear that private groups enjoy a private right action under section two of the voting rights act. we weighed in in this case in the eighth circuit and we'll continue to watch very closely what's playing out here.

>> most of the cases brought under section two, have they been brought by the government? have they been brought by private litigants? >> the raw numbers probably show that the sum total of work by private groups has been larger -- larger. >> private attorney generals. >> that's right. nonpartisan organizations, they absolutely have played a critical role working alongside the government to ensure that every eligible american has voice in our democracy. >> thank you very much. and while i know your shoes are more difficult to walk in than john lewis, you are walking in john lewis' shoes and i hope at all times you will remember that and continue to enforce voting rights. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, congressman. >> thank you, mister cohen. i will now recognize the gentleman from california, mister mcclintock. >> thank you, ms. clark, because i'm sure you've surmised the concern of many of us here involves the unequal application of the laws based on the political or ethnic identity of

those who the chair cited. many examples involving everything from acts of violence against pro-life clinics, to anti semitic hate crimes. for example, the law is only respected if it is applied evenly. so what can you tell us to address these concerns? >> thank you, congressman. i believe wholeheartedly that the division, the entire department is committed to evenhanded enforcement of the law. we follow the facts and we apply the law. when it comes to hate crimes, semitic violence and standing up to anti-semitic hate crimes is a top priority. >> what you say and what you do seem to be very different things. for example, how many prosecutions is your division initiated against violence and vandalism by antiabortionist groups such as jane's revenge , against anti-abortion clinics as opposed to the other way around? the chairman cited 126 prosecutions against pro-life groups and only four against pro-abortion groups under the face act?

are these numbers correct? and if they are, how do you explain them? >> well, i can't speak to prior administrations. what i can tell you is that in this year alone, we've had indictments in january and march. >> well, how many, how many prosecutions during your tenure have been initiated against pro-life groups? and how many against pro a -- abortion groups? >> well, i provided two examples from -- >> i'm looking at the entire totality of what you're doing. i'm not cherry-picking numbers. what are the actual numbers in totality? >> well, those are, those are two sets of indictments. >> you're not working every, let me go on. how many prosecutions is your division initiated against hate crimes directed against the jewish community as opposed to those? christopher wray said --

so i guess my question would be are 60% of your religious based hate crime prosecutions been in attacks against jewish americans? >> our tree of life prosecution, -- >> i'm looking at the totality. i'm not interested in your cherry picking one case that you've pursued. i want to know what is the total amount have 60% of your prosecutions been directed against religious base hate crimes directed at jewish americans. >> i can, i can provide, i can provide countless examples. >> for example, i want, i want the total number have 50% of your prosecutions been against hate crimes directed at jewish americans. yes or no. >> i don't have the precise number but countless examples. >> the precise number will tell us whether you are being candid in, in the relationship between what you say and what you do.

another concern is that the civil rights divisions perceived resistance to supreme court decisions forbidding universities from discriminating against applicants based on their race. and the students for fair admissions case, you called this a dog whistle that could invite a lot of chaos and unnecessarily create hysteria among colleges and universities who may fear that the government may come down on them for their efforts to maintain diversity on their campuses unquote. well, once the supreme court spoke clearly on this issue, your division released an advisory to universities telling them how to violate the law by quote, linking students' applications to their race. is the administration bound to obey the law or is it not? >> yes, congressman. >> and how do you explain that memo? >> we follow and abide by the rulings of the united states supreme court. >> your memo speaks to that. i mean, can you at least see how such a memo could be viewed as open defiance to the authority of the supreme court and the rule of law? >> we, we comply with the

mandate of the supreme court , congressman. >> but you're not. finally, how do you see the separation of jurisdictions between local law enforcement agencies and federal law enforcement? what cases do you believe the federal government should defer to local law enforcement agencies? well, we collaborate and work closely with local and state law enforcement. the tragic killing of ahmaud arbery is one example. the state of georgia did not have a hate crimes law on the books at the time that mister ahmaud arbery was tragically killed. our federal hate crime prosecution here was important. but every day we work to collaborate and coordinate. >> how often do you defer to local law? >> often. we have limited resources and rely on local and state governments to do their part in enforcing the law. thank you. >> thank you, gentlemen from california, recognize the

general lady from texas ms. escobar. >> thank you, mister chairman, assistant attorney general clark. thank you so much for being here today. your testimony and your service to our country. i want to especially recognize the civil rights division for the incredible work you all did prosecuting the self-proclaimed white nationalist who drove to my community in august 2019 to massacre latinos and anyone who looked like an immigrant per his confession. it was a very challenging trial for the community to relive the trauma and that horrific event. but i'm very grateful to the department for the work that you all did to ensure that my community received justice and all the victims and families receive justice. so i want to thank you for that. i have raised the issue before with your department about my state, the state of texas and governor greg abbott.

and the way that he is engaging specifically in border communities like my own and operation lone star is, is has been a project of governor abbott's that has essentially created some chaos in border communities like my own, high speed chases by dps that result in fatalities and significant property damage. but there are other violations as well. racial profiling, due process violations, unlawful detention of migrants without charges being filed and i could go on and on with the impact that operation lone star has had in texas. ms. clark, will you commit to a review of whether federal funding sources are being used to support operation lone star and whether such support

violates the civil rights act? >> thank you, congresswoman. we continue to monitor um operation lone star and um yes, we, we, we, we can commit to doing that. >> wonderful. thank you. we have -- there is a growing group of legislators, policymakers, not just in texas, but outside of texas sounding the alarm. so i really appreciate that. if advocates, members of the public or migrants themselves perceive a federal civil rights violation inflicted by a texas public official under operation lone star or otherwise to whom at the department of justice should they report this to? >> we encourage the public to bring forward complaints about law enforcement misconduct to the fbi. the civil rights division works closely with the fbi to investigate allegations of misconduct.

>> thank you so much. i also want to sound the alarm about a new bill that was passed by the texas state legislature. sb4, and sb4 is essentially texas effort to usurp federal immigration law with the, the creation of a new state level in -- immigration law. i believe, and many civil rights advocates believe this will increase the racial profiling that is happening in texas and that it is unconstitutional. are you aware of sb 4 in texas? >> very generally, and i'm happy to take a closer look. >> thank you. i think it's going to be really important. i'm not sure if the government, governor has signed it yet. we have urged the governor not to sign it.

it is pretty brazenly and blatantly unconstitutional. but if he does sign it, if there is such, maybe not referring to this law in particular. but if there were such a law that usurped federal immigration law, what could we expect from the department? >> when we identify violations of the law, we prosecute just by way of example, congresswoman , earlier this year, we indicted a member of the border patrol for engaging in misconduct. so we take seriously these allegations and where the law authorizes. we will prosecute. >> in terms of a state though, if a state legislature and a governor pass and sign a law that is blatantly unconstitutional what would the , department do? >> if appropriate, we could file suit, challenging the constitutionality of the law.

but here, we would have to, we would have to look more, more closely and carefully. >> ok. i welcome that review and that scrutiny. thank you so much, mister chairman. i yield back. >> i think the gentlelady from texas, and out recognize the gentleman from north carolina. mr. bishop. >> ms. clark in the biden v. excuse me, the missouri v biden case in the district court. the court explained quote, if the allegations made by the plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack on free speech in united states history. close quote. the court went on to find that the plaintiffs were reasonably likely to succeed on the merits at trial entered a preliminary injunction. the fifth circuit has affirmed supreme court has taken jurisdiction of the case. of course, that's all civil litigation. is any criminal investigation or prosecution of the persons responsible for that activity in the fbi, cisa and at the white house and their co-conspirators

underway in the civil rights division? >> congressman, i'm not familiar with this litigation but happy to bring your question back. >> thank you. let me make sure i am understanding that. you are not aware of the missouri v biden litigation that is currently being taken up by the united states supreme court. is that correct? >> unfortunately, i am not, congressman. >> assuming not, assuming that you're not aware of that. what reason would there be that the civil rights division of the justice department's leader is unaware of what a united states district court has described as the most massive attack on free speech in the united states history? >> if you could share more of the facts that could be helpful, congressman. >> otherwise you're just, you just don't know.

is that correct? >> that's correct. unfortunately, this does not appear to be a case that i'm familiar with. >> good enough. i'm gonna yield the balance of my time to the chairman. >> so i find that to be astounding. i do want to follow up on the line of question with the gentleman from california with respect to the face act implementation. because, ms. clark, you, you dismissed saying, well, i can't. whose time are we doing now? >> it's my time. >> i just wanted to point out that there have been at least 35 cases of the face act being applied to pro-life groups and, or churches or, you know, pro-life people that are anti abortion in your tenure, not even counting 2021. that's the data from 2022 and 2023 versus the four that we can point to, the one that you point to in january.

so the point gentleman in california, i would just ask you, you're in your possession of your hands. you had a foia request that was responded to from a left leaning group, the center for investigative reporting. we've been asking for a copy of that foia about the prosecution levels and the numbers from your office for a long time, i think for almost a year and we've not been responded to. so, will you commit to sharing that foia request and all of the data of face act prosecutions specifically under your watch. and generally? >> i can absolutely bring this back to the division's foia officials and ensure that you receive a timely response. please know that the division is committed to evenhanded enforcement of the -- >> even under your watch, it's at least 35 to 1 or two that is not evenhanded. that's far from evenhanded and importantly, mark halk who was targeted, had a raid of his home prosecuted under this was acquitted by a jury. have you apologized to him on behalf of the department of justice for that grave violation of his civil rights? having his family have to watch

him being raided at his home and then he's acquitted by a federal jury? have you apologized to him? well, we follow the facts and apply the law. that is our job and we welcome opportunities to engage with other pro-life groups that may be experiencing threats or the -- the answer to that is no. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'm -- i'm like, i think every member, at least on this side, but i would think every member, anyone watching it just astounded that you are not familiar. the assistant attorney general for the division of civil rights at the justice department is not familiar with a huge case, missouri v. biden, where in that case, i think it was six different federal agencies were found to be guilty of violating the first amendment liberties of americans. hhs, and iad, fbi, doj, dhs, even the white house itself. and you are not familiar with. that is truly and frankly, i don't know what i think that's why the gentleman had time to yield back because he didn't know what, i don't know what we

say. that -- that is, it's in front of the supreme court and the head of civil rights division doesn't know is that is, if that doesn't in and of itself show that this justice department is political in doing things for political reasons. i do not know what does. i yield back and i appreciate the gentleman' is question. i think the gentleman from north carolina and ohio. the lady from vermont is now recognized. >> thank you, mr. chair, assistant attorney general clark. thanks so much for being here. and i wanted to start by just personally thanking the justice department for its work regarding the massacre at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh on october 27th, 2018. as you know, this heinous act of anti-semitism took the lives of 11 jewish americans. and i just want to thank the doj for all the work there. and it's clear that anti semitism and islamophobia is um

tragically on the rise both around the globe and here in our own country. and my home state of vermont is not immune. in burlington over thanksgiving , three young palestinian americans were shot as they simply walked on the street. hashem, kenan, and tassin spoke a mix of arabic and english and two wore traditional kafi. and although the investigation will determine whether this horrible crime will meet the legal definition of a hate crime, we know and i say we all vermonters know that this was a hateful act. now, this act of violence is, is part of a disturbing and frightening trend. and all of us need to remember that we have a part to play in standing with and speaking out against our -- violence against our muslim neighbors. and recently attorney general garland stated that the fbi and

atf are investigating the incident, including whether the attack constituted a hate crime. now, i know that you cannot discuss specifics of the work, but i'm wondering if you can please, let us know that the civil rights division work as it relates to the investigation of hate crimes. i think vermonters would love to know? >> the justice department in particular, the fbi and atf are currently working with local and state law enforcement and looking into this very, very tragic matter. we have been incredibly vigilant since the october 7 tragedy that has unfolded in israel and in the middle east. anti semitic violence, islamophobic violence and the targeting of communities perceived to be jewish or muslim has no place in our society.

we will take seriously investigations of threats of violence, acts of violence and, and prosecute where appropriate . >> and so have you seen an increase in actual or potential anti-semitic or islamophobic incidents since october 7th? >> we have engaged with many organizations, jewish organizations, muslim organizations, all of whom are reporting that they themselves are seeing an uptick. we rely on the fbi data which comes out annually, but everything that we are hearing from groups makes clear that this is a moment that requires vigilance on the part of the federal government. and so that is what we are doing. >> and a follow-up, what steps specifically is the civil rights division doing to keep jewish americans and arab americans, muslim americans safe in their, and their communities? i know that there is just

growing anxiety and fear about basic safety and security. i'm wondering if you could just give us a few more details about what what the department can do and is doing. >> we're using the law, the tools that congress gave us laws like the matthew shepard and james bird hate crimes prevention act to hold perpetrators accountable. we realize we can't prosecute our way out of the crisis. and so we've also worked to institute programs like united against hate where every single us attorney's office across the country, all 94 have instituted programs bringing together local , state, federal law enforcement, community groups and faith leaders to ensure that folks know how to investigate and report hate incidents and hate crimes.

this is an all hands on deck moment. we stand for and behind all communities are being attacked by hate. >> what measures are being taken -- another topic -- what measures are being taken to combat discriminatory practices in gender care? >> live seen a number of states to have adopted bands and restrictions on gender affirming care.

we are very wary of the fact that i just just noted themselves in a ruling that discrimination against transgender people is discrimination based on sex so we bought -- we brought lawsuits against some of the discrimination discriminating access against transgender youth. >> thank you. i yield back. >> i now recognize -- >> are you sure you do not know anything about that case misery -- about that case missouri v. --? did you read the opinion from louisiana or the fifth circuit? >> it is not a civil rights

division case -- >> which is it when mr. bishop asked you said you did not know when think about it? >> i appreciate the opportunity to clarify. the civil division is handling this case and are compliant with the courts -- >> these are pretty fundamental rights, that is something you do not believe -- >> absolutely. that is a bedrock principle of our democracy -- let me cut -- >> let me cut -- what about politics? >> politics have no place -- >> there was a 30 day ban on carrying a concealed firearm on albuquerque that albuquerque sits in. what did the justice department do when they gave her that order

from new mexico? >> i am generally aware of the matter you are referring to both gun-control is not a core issue -- >> second amendment, fundamental rights, these are very important. >> these are very important. >> tell me what the government did -- >> i am happy to bring the question back. >> you don't know that either? you don't know what they did in response? the county general said this was unconstitutional, unenforceable and incapable of stopping gun violence. the attorney general, a democrat, said this would not have any impact on public safety and does not pass constitutional

bluster. when the attorney general says it does not fit the constitution but the doj does not do a thing, is that what you're telling me? >> politics have no place in the work of the justice department -- >> are you aware of anything the justice department did to that? >> not in the civil rights department -- not in the civil justice department. >> did the civil justice department do anything? in this case? >> i won't bring that back to my colleagues -- >> i will give you the answer, they did not do anything. they did not do a thing. that gives you the answer from earlier. it shows you help clinical you are. when texas passed that bill in september 20 21, eight days later, the department of justice

announced something into that bill. help me pass the state senate and the governor. you guys are in there contesting that 8 days later. you guys have something in new mexico. that is an assault from the government. it did not go to the legislator. the department of justice does nothing. >> the civil rights division is deeply committed to enforcing the laws that this body gave us. committed to standing up for the rights of all americans, chairman. >> based on some of your answers, not knowing what is on missouri v. biden.

that is why we are concerned. >> you asked previous questions about the texas law. you said that you guys, the civil rights division, you can file a lawsuit. lawsuit was filed in the case to determine is talking about. you guys did not participate in that. do disregard second amendment rights -- do you guys disregard second amend rights, and if they do violate, is that not important enough for you guys to get involved in? >> i understand the order was within two days of entry but i want to make clear that gun control is not an area that the civil rights division under any division does not historically work it is important.

the second amendment is an important part of our constitution. >> just an important follow-up, you're saying that the second amendment will not enforce civil rights. >> weighing in on second amendment, gun control issues across any amendment has not been a core aspect of any of our work. >> we are trying to tie in our ideals and equal justice and law. thank you for being here. >> thank you for your career and public service for all people. i was excited for your nomination and confirmation into

this role. i do believe you're doing your best to advance the cause of justice inside the government. from the front line to congress, want to say thank you for your work. i think the department, from what was said in september, can do more to advance civil rights in the room of law. these are systemwide and predate your time of justice. the civil rights division handles cases that involve law-enforcement and misconduct in federal rights, correct? >> that is correct. >> i strongly believe the actions of georgia law enforcement involving the killing --

as it is also known as "cop city" in relation to violations of civil rights. what is happening in atlanta, can happen anywhere in the country. we need the doj to do your part in preventing that from happening. the safe streets act, this vital lot makes it sure that funding do not age in -- this vital lot makes it sure that the funding does not engage in any discrete nation. this involves the killing of michael brown. i was glad to see the announcement in 2022 that enforced these provisions.

i've yet to see any meaningful progress by the department implementing any of them. do you have any updates for the committee about the departments implementation of these commitments. >> if i could flag one area, it would be what we have found extraordinary compliments and title vi to stand up for communities that are beleaguered by environmental injustice problems. houston, texas. alabama, these are two examples of places where we have for the first time used title vi, and areas that have disproportionately and balanced and brown communities. >> one final issue is about conditions in prisons and jails. i have been demanding answers about the horrific conditions in

the justice center. i know your team has investigated conditions of jails in south carolina and elsewhere. i would love to speak more about this issue with you. we must not forget about the humanity of people incarcerated. we cannot prosecute our way into justice but the civil rights division is the crown jewel of the department and for good reason. i know there are people in the division who want to use the law to stop discrimination instead of enabling it. to stop police brutality and the -- to stop that relentless and inhumane attack on our lbgtq committees, instead of enabling it. that is the work of the civil rights committee. what you have done despite the efforts of the right wing community's efforts to strip away our rights and land.

we will not let them succeed. thank you for being here and thank you for the work that you do and support of equality and justice for all. i am your ally in this work and i look forward to partnering with you. in our final few seconds plus, the last one went over, at the guy have more time. if there's anything else you would like to clear up? >> people do not like to abandon their civil rights. the jailhouse issue you brought up. violations of the civil rights incarceration act is important to us. you noted the investigation in south carolina. we are also investigating prison conditions in georgia -- in texas where we are looking at juvenile detention facilities. mississippi, new jersey, and more.

such an important area of enforcement for this department of justice civil rights division. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. >> i would like to yield to you. >> one question and i will yield to the gentleman from arizona. in terms of jails and incarceration. have you done any investigation into how people have been treated in the jails in relation to the january 6 attack in d.c.? >> yes. there was one matter that was brought to us by the core and we did respond to the judges. >> have you launched an investigation into the treatment of those facilities and if you have, can you release the information to us? >> we have.

-- >> i yield back. >> i want to continue the conversation we're having about new mexico. on to talk about disparity, it looks like it is almost 16-1 with people prosecuted 16 times to 1, since the dobbs case was leaks, there has been almost 100 attacks on pro-life centers, birthing centers, and churches. that makes the numbers even more disparate and increases the deception -- increases the perception of bias. you have said your job was to enforce the constitution, even

handing enforcement and implying the law -- even handling enforcement in applying the law. in texas, there was a question you were given because of a representative on the other side being upset because the legislator and governor in acton a lot that she felt was unconstitutional -- and the governor enacted a law that she felt was unconstitutional. and they said, we could file suit. the reason i bring that up, when i asked you, and when the chairman was asking, did you file a statement of interest with the governor of new mexico's abridgment of the second rights of new mexicans of the county. you cannot carry a handgun outside of your home.

we enforce laws that congress passes and enacts. after i heard that, -- we could file a lawsuit. has congress enacted a law that would allow you to investigate on border security issues? >> no. congress has not given the civil rights division in possession of firearms -- >> but you told us that you could file a lawsuit vis-a-vis of a state trying to enforce the border because they are being overrun. are you telling me define some statutory authority for that?

>> only if there is a violation of federal law that has input on the books that the division is tasked with enforcing. that would be a qualifier. >> what you're telling me is that the second amendment is directly being violated in such a way that you are right, there was an injection immediately because my private action was brought and you all never weighed into it. nobody from the doj ever weighed into it. you're saying you could not go forward with that i find that absolutely astonishing. i'm sorry to take up all this time. for the record, and your article, the prosecutor says wherein it discloses that the individual shot at the police four times before fire was returned.

i yield back. >> i will now yield stability from has a mania -- i will now yield to the lady from pennsylvania. >> received some questions about the d.c. jail that we heard increasingly from any of our colleagues on the right. since january 6, isn't it true that the d.c. jail had deplorable conditions for decades before january 2021? >> i cannot speak to formal findings. the more resources, we could do more. we want jails and prisons that comply with the constitution and the mandate of the civilized persons institution act. >> i would like to go to a time

magazine article from 2022 entitled the d.c. jail again decades before january 6 defendant started racing concerns. >> thank you. >> yes. >> concerns had been raised for quite some time. in the wake of -- this seems to be filled by the lies of the former president and other election deniers. these challenges are not without cost. they undermine confidence in our elections without grounds and they have cost taxpayers millions of dollars over time in legal fees, etc. we have also seen attacks on our

officials, particularly true in pennsylvania, the keystone state i live, a perennial battleground state. the counties i represent have been -- including following our recent municipal elections. wakanda department of justice do to help states and localities address these attacks on our election systems and what guidance can be provided with respect to audits, etc. >> there has been an election sets tax force that has been launched that includes representation from across the department, including our criminal division. threats and acts of violence have no place in our political discourse and our tax force -- our task force is open to people

who want to bring forward complaints. >> we have some conversation today about how the department of justice is helping our cities provide -- is helping our cities fight crime. can you talk about some of the things your department is doing to help archimedes implement 20 policing practices in a way that keeps everyone safe -- is doing to help implement policing practices and a way that keeps everyone safe? >> we take seriously our -- to address misconduct. there has been a number of cases open in cities such as memphis,

louisville, state police and more. this represents an infant tinsel -- this represents a small number but are important investigations because we want public safety and we want policing that is biased free. they comports with the standards of the constitution. i engage with organizations such as the international organization of police and believe training and grantmaking are important ways to support law enforcement. >> i know that is true from those that are seeking funding and resources so that their officers are well-trained and able to handle whatever is thrown at them. there have been a couple things i want to correct for the record. there have been some

mischaracterizations of statistics. one of them suggesting there is a disproportionate numbers of patterns and practice investigations starting under your leadership. of course, that is in contrast to the fact that the prior administration had eliminated that. there has been an attempt to contrast the number of face act prosecutions that have occurred since the face act was passed in 1994. it was passed in response to murders and physical attacks on abortion care providers. that was the jet -- that was the genesis of that act. i commend the fact that you are

evenhandedly applying that when anyone for whatever reason provides or takes action against someone who was providing reproductive health care. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. we now recognize -- >> i yield back. >> thank you. to the chair of the judiciary committee. >> thank you. who is --? >> i'm not familiar. >> she is an 85-year-old activist who survived world war ii the guys have charged under the face act for praying and singing in front of an abortion clinic. is that the department of

justice best use of its time and energy? >> as noted, the face act is a lot that this body passed in response to efforts to obstruct access to reproductive health clinics, acts of violence, we follow the facts and apply the law without fear or favor. >> really? i think we heard a lot about that today. if you are pro-life, you get the full treatment. just ask a vital -- just ask ava eddle. how about your decision about spacex? does elon musk's purchase of

twitter have the department justices decision about spacex? >> the decision about space x was open during the last administration. we followed that under it -- under the administration act. an important law with bipartisan support signed into law by president reagan. >> what you allege that space x did wrong? >> the company is not compliant with the anti-discriminatory divisions of the national -- nationality act -- >> what do mean? >> they have received asylum status by our courts -- >> there discriminate against

refugees and asylum-seekers, is that right? >> no cochairman. against people who have received refugee and asylum status by our courts and enjoy equal standing under federal law to u.s. citizens and nationalize citizens. the lot requires equal treatment of these individuals. >> you are saying they did not hire enough refugees or people who have been granted asylum. is that what you are asserting in the lawsuit? >> state discourage these people from applying for any job. whether it is custodial, office clerk, all the way up through engineering. >> you are sitting space x because they hired too many americans -- you are suing space x because they hired too many americans, too many u.s. citizens, because they did not hire enough refugees and those

seeking asylum -- those granted asylum? is that right? >> we apply the laws that this body gave us without fear or favor. >> they are dealing with national security type at space x. that is why they focus on hiring people who have a green card or who are american citizens. we need to charge this 87-year-old concentration camp survivor, that is what the biden administration needs to do but we do not know anything about missouri v biden. we did not do anything to weigh in where they told american citizens they could not exercise

their second amendment right. you try to tell us it is not political? i find it almost laughable you're making that argument. anything with common sense can see, you guys are definitely political. i yield back. >> out liked us consent to enter into the record a letter from a mr. paul teller to advance american freedom, that is noting the significant spike in anti-semitic vandalism, harassment and asking the department of justice of education who have expensive jurisdiction over this -- over these matters, following up across numerous groups across

the country. now recognize, from wyoming. >> on october 12, there was issued a joint statement i sent you a letter on november 6 but have yet to receive a response. as you know, this emphasizes the goal act this warns banks not to use immigration status, including whether vandalism is lawfully present in the country to determine the ability to take out a loan. the joint statement admits that equal credit opportunity act does not prohibit consideration of immigration status. this is an attempt to dissuade our financial institutions from -- [indiscernible] this could cause very severe

damage to our financial institutions. seems to me they are tempting to go beyond congress and are using threats to further this immigration's -- further this administration's that are only making things of the southern border were spared -- [indiscernible] >> thank you. as noted, the law contemplates that a person's immigration status often in conjunction with other factors could be relevant to determining repayment prospects. >> what was the purpose of issuing this joint statement? >> to clarify the law which

requires, it is seeking clarity. >> they are required to loan money to illegal aliens? >> no. >> one can i expect a response to my letter? >> i will speak to my colleagues to ensure you receive a response. we will work with our office of legislative affairs to respond. have you been contacted by any financial institutions about the statement? >> no. >> have you taken any steps to ensure that -- to ensure that these financial institutions are aware of what the law says? >> yes. this is to apply clarity. there institutions that want to -- there are institutions that want to have clarity and make sure they not running around a lot.

>> -- >> what steps have you and the civil rights department have taken? >> for what purpose? >> saieh pending case are now -- is that a pending case rate now? >> we are ensuring they are not engaging in redlining or any conduct -- but you're not try to force them to loan to legal aliens. you'll take that into factor when deciding who will get a loan? >> think the general woman from

wyoming -- thank the woman from wyoming. >> there was a protest from the texas state capital. i have a video looking at it right now. sitting in front of the texas capitol building, there are people, americans gathering, chanting "fire, ouchi -- "fire, fauci." there was a tweet -- earlier i asked you about defunding police and you neither repudiated or stood by it. i think he went around it. as the head of the civil rights division, civil rights for americans, he said, these people should be publicly identified if

and when they fall ill and are denied coverage under the insurance for chanting "fire, fauci." does the doj stand by that statement? >> i don't know the context for that statement. imagine this was issued during the heat of the pandemic. but the chair, i sit before you with commitment to ensure that all americans are treated fairly and equally under the law. >> simulate to the hearing, with that, that concludes today's hearing. we think you -- we tahnk you, ms. clark.

with that statement, this meeting is adjourned. [gavel] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [indistinct chatter]