Newly released internal communications are shedding additional light on one of the most controversial Justice Department actions of the Biden administration: the October 2021 memorandum directing federal law enforcement to address alleged threats against school officials amid a wave of heated school board protests.
The documents, obtained by America First Legal through a Freedom of Information Act battle and shared with The New York Post, suggest that some senior law enforcement officials expressed reservations about the memo before it was issued.
At the center of the revelations is an email from then-FBI Deputy Assistant Director Jay Greenberg, who raised concerns with Justice Department officials on the very day Attorney General Merrick Garland’s memo was released.
“We have some concern with the attached and would like additional time to engage with you before this messaging is released,” Greenberg wrote to DOJ officials Iris Lan and Kevin Driscoll on October 4, 2021.
Greenberg went further, indicating that the FBI and DOJ may not have been fully aligned on the matter.
“I would ask for any assistance you can provide in helping us get time to find common ground we can all support,” he wrote.
The documents do not fully explain the nature of Greenberg’s concerns, though correspondence suggests discussions between FBI and DOJ officials occurred around the same time.
The memo itself emerged during a period of intense public frustration over school policies. Across the country, parents packed school board meetings to voice opposition to COVID-19 mandates, masking requirements, school closures, and the teaching of concepts related to critical race theory. Emotions often ran high, and some meetings devolved into shouting matches and confrontations.
Garland’s memo cited what the Justice Department described as a “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”
The department announced efforts to coordinate with federal, state, and local law enforcement to address those concerns.
Almost immediately, critics accused the administration of treating concerned parents as potential domestic extremists. Conservative lawmakers argued the memo risked chilling legitimate political speech and public participation at local government meetings.
The newly released records show that skepticism wasn’t limited to Republican critics.
Four days after the memo’s release, Garland’s own staff received concerns from Jonathan Thompson of the National Sheriffs’ Association.
According to an internal email written by Peter Hyun, then chief of staff in the Office of the Associate Attorney General, Thompson questioned why the federal government was becoming involved in what many viewed as local matters.
Thompson reportedly stated that he had “not heard any concerns about threats to local school boards” from sheriffs around the country.
Hyun wrote that Thompson also expressed frustration that local law enforcement had not been given advance notice of the initiative.
“He claimed that his sheriffs have not heard from anyone at the bureau, and it would have been nice to have a heads-up,” Hyun noted in the email.
The document release also revives questions about White House involvement in the creation of the memo.
Previous records obtained by America First Legal indicated that officials within the Biden White House’s Domestic Policy Council were in communication with the National School Boards Association. The newly released documents show that White House official Ephraim McDowell was in contact with the organization and helped facilitate its communication with the Justice Department.
The NSBA had sent a letter expressing concerns about escalating confrontations at school board meetings, and DOJ officials reportedly used material from that correspondence while drafting Garland’s memo.
America First Legal argues the documents demonstrate that the administration ignored warnings from law enforcement professionals while advancing a politically motivated agenda.
“These documents prove that the Biden Administration ignored explicit warnings from the FBI’s own leadership and the National Sheriffs Association,” said Ian Prior, a senior adviser to the organization.
The records also include an internally circulated list of 28 incidents involving disruptions at school board meetings. According to reports, many of the examples involved anti-mask protests, verbal confrontations, and disorderly conduct rather than explicit threats of violence.
Supporters of the memo have long argued that public officials deserve protection from genuine threats and intimidation. Critics maintain that the administration blurred the line between criminal behavior and constitutionally protected dissent.
Nearly five years later, the controversy continues to generate debate because it touches on broader questions about government power, free speech, parental involvement in education, and the role federal law enforcement should play in local political disputes.
The newly disclosed documents are unlikely to settle those arguments. If anything, they provide fresh ammunition for those who contend that concerns about the memo existed inside the government long before the public learned about them.
