 As the House debates the extent of domestic surveillance of the American people under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, our representatives should note a breaking story – that the FBI has investigated the Cato Institute and its employees for years. Of course, no one is above the law and anyone who appears to have committed a crime can be investigated. But the Cato Institute? Really? This libertarian think tank attracted luminaries like Nobel Prize-winning economists, including the late Milton Friedman and the late Friedrich Hayek. Its policy papers, podcasts, and videos stand out for their quality of writing and the depth of their research. In a city where many nonprofit public policy institutes are little more than dressed-up public relations shops, Cato fellows are notable for their intellectual integrity and fearless honesty. In 2019, the FBI responded to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Cato fellow Patrick Eddington by swearing that it had “no records” on the organization. On April 15, the FBI reversed course, admitting under pressure from federal Judge James Boasberg that it has investigated Cato employees and the Institute itself for years for potential crimes. What could these crimes be? Improper footnoting? Misuse of p-values in statistical analysis? Eddington writes: “You will search the public record in vain to find any indictment, federal criminal charge, or prosecution of any current or former Cato Institute employee or any charge against the Institute itself for any violation of federal law … “These are two distinct but reinforcing problems: an active criminal investigation running in parallel with classified intelligence collection, both shielded from disclosure, both targeting a prominent First Amendment organization, with no public prosecutorial output to show for it. “So we now have a publicly filed, sworn declaration confirming an active, years-long FBI criminal investigation potentially targeting Cato employees – with zero public record of any resulting indictment, charge, or prosecution spanning what appears to be a timeframe that runs at minimum from before the original 2019 FOIA request through the present. That’s a potentially very long-running investigation of an IRS-recognized, prominent public policy organization engaged in First Amendment-protected activity that, as far as public records reflect, has produced nothing in the way of charges.” Eddington concludes: “This is precisely the fact pattern that has historically characterized politically motivated surveillance operations conducted under color of law.” Many on the left also complain that the FBI has subjected their First Amendment organizations to undue scrutiny. Something to think about before the House accepts a rule that would allow no reform amendments to the Section 702 surveillance authority. Comments are closed.
|
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed