On April 14, 2026, the Department of Justice's Weaponization Working Group released its first report, a nearly 900-page exposé of how the Biden Administration enforced the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. Based on a review of more than 700,000 internal records, the report details a pattern of selective prosecution, coordination with abortion industry groups, and prosecutorial misconduct.

Thomas More Society represented clients in nearly every major FACE Act prosecution examined in the report, including United States v. Houck, United States v. Gallagher, United States v. Zastrow, and United States v. Handy. Every criminal case highlighted in the report resulted in a presidential pardon or acquittal.

Here are 15 of the most significant revelations we found in the report and what they mean:

1. Biden prosecutors called Thomas More Society "quite the racket" and predicted our lawyers would be "particularly . . . Unpleasant."

In an email chain discussing the plan to arrest Houck and prepare press releases, a prosecutor wrote that he expected Thomas More Society attorneys to be "particularly . . . Unpleasant." After Houck's acquittal, AUSA Ashley Martin sent Patel a link to a video of Thomas More Society Executive VP & Head of Litigation Peter Breen discussing the case. Patel responded: "Thomas moore society [sic.] is quite the racket." The report characterizes this as Patel "derogatorily describ[ing] these attorneys—a pro-life public interest law firm." We consider it a compliment!

2. In every single pardoned FACE Act case, the DOJ's direction came from the abortion industry, not from purported victims or law enforcement.

The report found that "in each of the later-pardoned FACE Act cases, DOJ and the FBI learned of the possible FACE violations from abortion NGOs, rather than from the purported victims or local law enforcement." The three groups driving enforcement were the National Abortion Federation (NAF), Planned Parenthood, and the Feminist Majority Foundation (a radical abortion advocacy organization). Thomas More Society raised concerns about this coordination throughout the litigation, and the report now confirms it was even more pervasive than we knew.

3. The National Abortion Federation (NAF) compiled a 137-page dossier on pro-life individuals and handed it to the DOJ and FBI.

Before an annual conference held by a pro-life group, NAF sent the DOJ's Task Force Director "a 137-page memorandum on the conference schedule, lodging, and multi-page dossiers on numerous 'anti-choice individuals,' including many of the pardoned defendants.

These dossiers contained personally identifying information, such as addresses, photographs (including spouses and minor children), names of associates, travel plans, and even drivers' license numbers. The FBI itself flagged this as tracking "1st Amendment protected activity, but the investigations moved forward anyway. Many of the individuals in those dossiers became Thomas More Society clients.

4. NAF The DOJ's lead FACE Act prosecutor, Sanjay Patel, called NAF's security director a "MVP" and "all-around superstar."

Task Force Director Sanjay Patel, who oversaw FACE Act enforcement nationwide, described NAF's Security Director as an "MVP" at bringing incidents to the DOJ's "attention, often in real-time, which usually result in an investigation/prosecution." This is the same prosecutor who oversaw the cases against our clients Mark Houck, Lauren Handy, and others. He was terminated the day before the report's release.

5. That same prosecutor helped NAF secure $190,000 in grants... while NAF had active matters before his office.

Patel agreed to serve as a professional reference on NAF's application for a private foundation grant. NAF ultimately received $90,000 in 2021 and $100,000 in 2022 from that foundation. However, the report found "no record of ethics approval for a DOJ attorney to take an interest in the financial outcome of a party having business before the Biden DOJ." Our attorneys raised ethical questions throughout these prosecutions, based on, it turns out, well-founded concerns.  

6. The Biden DOJ sought sentences more than double for pro-life defendants compared to pro-abortion defendants.

Per the report, "the Biden DOJ requested an average sentence of 26.8 months for pro-life defendants, compared to 12.3 months for pro-choice defendants." Pro-life defendants were ultimately sentenced to an average of 14 months, while pro-abortion defendants received an average of 3 months. Thomas More Society argued selective prosecution in multiple cases. These numbers confirm the disparity was systemic, not anecdotal.

7. A quarter of all FACE Act prosecutions in history occurred under the Biden administration, while attacks on pro-life facilities went largely ignored.

The Biden DOJ charged more than 45 pro-life defendants in over 20 cases, accounting for approximately a quarter of all FACE Act prosecutions since the law was enacted in 1994. During the same period, it charged only five individuals for attacks on pregnancy resource centers. And despite numerous violent attacks against churches in the wake of the Dobbs decision, "the Biden DOJ did not pursue a single FACE Act case involving houses of worship during this time."

8. Prosecutors wanted the Houck case to be the "first post-Dobbs FACE indictment."

Internal emails reveal that prosecutors in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania "wanted to confirm that the Houck matter would be the 'first post-Dobbs FACE indictment.'" The case against Mark Houck, a Catholic father of seven defended by Thomas More Society, became a flashpoint in the Biden DOJ's aggressive posture toward pro-life advocates after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

9. Thomas More Society offered to bring Houck in voluntarily. The DOJ refused, and the FBI sent 16 armed agents instead.

Thomas More Society attorney Matt Heffron wrote directly to the assigned prosecutor, citing controlling precedent from the same district and offering "to accept a summons on my client's behalf, rather put Mr. Houck and his family through needless disruption." The DOJ declined. On September 23, 2022, "sixteen FBI agents arrived at Houck's home in seven vehicles" at 7:03 AM. They "arrested and handcuffed Houck outside his front door while his family watched from inside." A jury later acquitted him.  

10. Patel tried to blame the FBI for arresting Houck, because "the FBI really likes to make arrests."

In an internal assessment of lessons learned, Patel wrote that the FBI's "main reason" for arresting Houck rather than allowing self-surrender was to seize phones for search warrants, "but that 'I think the unspoken reason is bc the FBI really likes to make arrests.'" After the Houck family spoke publicly about the traumatic raid, one prosecutor complained internally that "Mrs. Houck is attempting to taint the public's view of the arrest and prosecution."

11. Prosecutors searched for ways to screen Christian jurors and called pro-life beliefs "culty."

In the Zastrow trial, prosecutors "looked for ways to screen possible jurors based on their conservative or religious views, while not inquiring about liberal counterviews." One could not think of "an 'anodyne way to ask' questions about 'religion, how often people go to services, etc.'" They searched for "an indirect way to get some more info about religion without directly asking it" and ultimately "flagged several Christian jurors for peremptory and for-cause strikes from the jury pool because of their faith." During trial preparation, a prosecutor described pro-life Christians and their language as "culty." Thomas More Society Senior Counsel Steve Crampton represented defendants in this case and raised religious bias concerns throughout.

12. In United States v. Zastrow, the DOJ prosecution sought to ask potential jurors if they were familiar with Thomas More Society during jury selection.

The government's proposed jury questionnaire for the Michigan trial in United States v. Zastrow included the question: "Are any of you familiar with the Thomas More Society?" It also listed our attorney Steve Crampton among defense counsel jurors were to be asked about during jury selection.

13. DOJ prosecutors were unhappy that Thomas More Society was publicly calling out about the government's weaponization of the FACE Act.

In internal drafts, a prosecutor described the news sources listed in the above questionnaire as places where Crampton had been on "his press rampage claiming that the gov is persecuting Christians for praying for mothers." The report proves Crampton was right.

14. DOJ prosecutors complained about a "very Catholic magistrate" and tried to ban "Jesus is Lord" buttons at Michigan trial.

In the Michigan case, United States v. Zastrow, a prosecutor complained that they "ended up with a very Catholic magistrate on duty this week and he was very particular about the bond conditions and not infringing on their first amendment rights. At the end, we ended up with overly lawyered bond conditions that would be difficult to enforce!" During trial, the prosecution asked the court to limit defendants' ability to wear "Jesus buttons." When one defendant wore a button reading "Jesus is Lord," a prosecutor raised concerns about "improper messaging" to the jury. The judge was skeptical.

15. The DOJ withheld prosecution data from defense counsel while sharing it with abortion groups.

In United States v. Gallagher, the Tennessee FACE Act case where Thomas More Society represented Paul Vaughn, defense counsel requested historical prosecution data to prepare a selective prosecution defense. The Task Force Director "declined, stating that he did not 'keep the[se] kind of records' and did not believe that the Department 'will provide them.' Notably, he had this information readily available and decided not to share it with the defendants, despite sharing substantially identical information with NAF."

‍

This report is a vindication for every pro-life American who was told they were imagining things when they raised the alarm about selective prosecution. It is also a hard-won vindication for the clients Thomas More Society defended when the full weight of the federal government crashed down on them.  

In January 2025, Thomas More Society submitted formal pardon petitions to President Trump on behalf of 21 pro-life Americans unjustly prosecuted under the FACE Act. President Trump granted every one. This report confirms that every one of those pardons was justified.

In spite of all this, the FACE Act still remains on the books, and Thomas More Society is leading the fight on Capitol Hill to repeal it for good. Until it is gone, the potential for this kind of abuse remains.

To read the full DOJ report, click here.