{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/%E2%80%8Einternal-us-marshals-policy-ambiguous-whistleblower-rights", "Internal U.S. Marshals Policy Ambiguous on Whistleblower Rights", "2015-11-24", "2015", "2015-11", "Republican", "House", "IA", "Charles Grassley", "G000386", "www.grassley.senate.gov", null, null, "legacy", "WASHINGTON  An internal U.S. Marshals Service policy limiting communications with Congress does not clearly express legal protections for employees who disclose fraud, waste or misconduct. The policy can lead to confusion for staff, and impede oversight needed to improve government operations and guard taxpayer dollars. In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is calling on the agency to clarify the policy to include legally protected rights of employees to communicate with Congress. Grassley's letter follows an October 23, 2015, letter to Lynch reiterating whistleblower protections after the Committee obtained email correspondence in which an assistant chief inspector at the Marshals Service discouraged an employee from communicating with the Senate Judiciary Committee on an oversight matter. In February, Grassley raised similar concerns with the FBI, which later revised ITS policy to articulate that it should be applied in a manner consistent with federal law, specifically including whistleblower protections. Grassley has been investigating claims of improper hiring practices and misuse of funds at the Marshals Service for much of this year following whistleblower disclosures. Full text of Grassley's letter to Lynch follows:  November 23, 2015  VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION The Honorable Loretta E. Lynch  Attorney General  U.S. Department of Justice  950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW  Washington, DC 20530 Dear Attorney General Lynch: On October 23, 2015, I sent a letter describing an apparent instruction by Assistant Chief Inspector Sharon Duncan of the U.S. Marshals Service Office of Internal Affairs, to a federal employee to refrain from any direct communications with this Committee.  Among other things, that letter asked what steps the Department would take to prevent Assistant Chief Inspector Duncan from interfering with employees' rights to speak directly to Congress and to determine whether the USMS has violated the relevant statutory and appropriations restrictions. As the Department and the USMS more closely examine these allegations and work to provide a timely and complete response to the October 23, 2015, letter, I have additional questions regarding the USMS Congressional Affairs policy. Specifically, I am concerned that USMS Policy may present employees with an inaccurate or incomplete understanding of the role and responsibility of the Office of Congressional Affairsas well as their own rights and obligations in communicating with Congress. The policy states: The Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) is the only office authorized to communicate with Members of Congress and their staffs on behalf of the USMS. Only the Director, Chief of Staff, Associate Director of Administration, Associate Director for Operations, or the OCA may authorize exceptions to this directive. If an exception is authorized, the employee meeting with the Member or Staff will submit a written report of the meeting to the OCA within five business days of such meetingEmployees may contact Members of Congress and their staffs to express their personal views on legislationor seek personal assistance on issues of concern.  Although the policy speaks to employees' ability to communicate their personal views on legislation or seek personal assistance on issues of concern, it does not explicitly address protected disclosures or fully explain what it means to speak on behalf of the USMS. The Committee understands and appreciates the agency's need to coordinate official positions on matters of policy, privilege, and procedure; however, whistleblowers have expressed their own belief and concern that this policy may prevent them from communicating with this Committee or with other Members of Congress. Moreover, evidence suggests that the policy may be contributing not only to employees' but also managers' misunderstanding of the applicable rights and obligations.  In addition to the allegations against USMS OPR described in the October 23, 2015, letter, the Committee has received reports that USMS leadership have affirmatively discouraged direct communication with Members of Congress and their staffs. Some managers' directions apparently have left employees with the impression that all communication, no matter the content, must be funneled through their chain of command and the Office of Congressional Affairs. The policy thus appears to cause or potentially contribute to a chilling effect on whistleblowers' willingness and ability to disclose waste, fraud, and abuse to Congress.     The USMS policy thus also may deprive Congress of precisely the type of unfiltered information from whistleblowers that is necessary for the Committee's various functions. As noted in previous letters to the Department, 5 U.S.C.  7211 provides as follows: The right of employees, individually or collectively, to petition Congress or a Member of Congress, or to furnish information to either House of Congress, or to a committee or Member thereof, may not be interfered with or denied.  Furthermore, two anti-gag appropriations riders prevent the USMS from spending any appropriated funds to enforce such a policy as described by Section 1.3 or to pay the salary of any USMS who attempts or threatens to enforce such a policy. Specifically, one of the appropriations riders prohibits the use of funds to enforce any government nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement that does not make it clear that disclosures to Congress are still allowed.  The other anti-gag appropriations rider provides, in relevant part, as follows: No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be available for the payment of the salary of any officer or employee of the Federal Government, whoprohibits or prevents, or attempts or threatens to prohibit or prevent, any other officer or employee of the Federal Government from having any direct oral or written communication or contact with any Member, committee, or subcommittee of the Congress in connection with any matter pertaining to the employment of such other officer or employee or pertaining to the department or agency of such other officer or employee in any way, irrespective of whether such communication or contact is at the initiative of such other officer or employee or in response to the request or inquiry of such Member, committee, or subcommittee.  On February 13, 2015, I sent a letter to the FBI regarding a similar policy that seemed to discourage employees from communicating with Congress.  On February 27, 2015, the FBI responded that they had modified the policy, [R]evising the section that articulates the policy's purpose to emphasize that it should be read and applied consistent with federal law, including whistleblower protections.  Hence, by December 7, 2015, please describe what steps the USMS is taking to clarify for its employees and contractors that the aforementioned current policy does not interfere with or prevent an USMS employee or contractor's statutorily protected right to communicate directly with Congress.      If you have any questions, please contact DeLisa Lay of my Committee staff at (202) 224-5225. Thank you for your cooperation regarding this matter.              Sincerely,           Charles E. Grassley  Chairman  Senate Committee on the Judiciary  cc:   Patrick J. Leahy  Ranking Member Senate Committee on the Judiciary   -30-", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/%E2%80%8Einternal-us-marshals-policy-ambiguous-whistleblower-rights"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.3493930455297232, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}