The attorney for a group of former Capitol Police intelligence officers says that the Capitol law enforcement agency’s revamped vetting procedures potentially violate First Amendment rights.
Solomon Law Firm attorney Dan Gebhardt told Politico in a lengthy statement that his clients, five former members of the department’s intelligence division, have long held concerns over the Capitol Police’s intelligence gathering and vetting practices. Gebhardt’s clients all served in the Capitol Police during the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Gebhardt described some specific issues that his clients said were problematic. At one point, Capitol Police analysts were asked to comb through the history of a religious leader who oversaw a funeral attended by a member of Congress. In another instance, analysts were instructed to look into the background of the relatives of members of Congress, according to Politico.
“Analysts’ complaints were filed with the USCP chain of command, Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and Inspector General (IG), as well as Congressional committees,” Gebhardt said.
The attorney also said that his clients raised concerns about Capitol Police procedures that were put in place after the January 6 riot. As part of normal operations, members of Congress and others hosting events on Capitol Hill share guest lists and other information with Capitol Police ahead of the planned event. As part of the Capitol Police’s new security procedures, intelligence analysts would use those guest lists to comb through the social media posts of attendees. Sometimes that background work spread to encompass Congressional staff.
The Capitol Police executive team denied the allegations in a statement.
“These old accusations continue to be misleading,” the Capitol Police said. “The USCP uses the same common sense best practices as other protective agencies to ensure the safety of Members of Congress and the public at a time when threats against lawmakers are higher than ever. An event assessment is only done at the request of the Member’s office or protection detail and are much more limited than a threat investigation. The work is ethical and lawful. Nevertheless, we requested an independent review by the Inspector General back in January.”
Republicans in Congress have accused the Capitol Police of spying on GOP members. Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) in February said that Capitol Police in November of last year “entered [his] office without [his] knowledge and photographed confidential legislative products.” Nehls added that Capitol Police agents later questioned his staff while dressed as construction workers.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) released a statement following Nehls’ claims saying that Gohmert’s mail was being illegally routed through the Department of Justice before coming to his office. He also suggested that Nehls’ allegations are an example of “Democrat’s spying on political opponents.”
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger denied Nehls’ allegations in a statement afterward. Nehls also revealed in a January letter to Congress that the Capitol Police Inspector General would conduct an investigation into the spying allegations.