AI Overviews: Second Amendment Task Force

Could the Second Amendment Task Force have initially been established as a FACA compliant advisory committee to include a non-government panel of experts?

Yes, the Attorney General could have established a FACA-compliant advisory committee to include a panel of non-government experts instead of creating an internal DOJ task force

. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) provides a legal framework for this, and the DOJ regularly creates such bodies. 

Differences between the two approaches

Aspect FACA-Compliant Advisory Committee Internal DOJ Task Force

Membership Can include outside experts, stakeholders, and other non-government personnel. Consists solely of full-time federal employees from within the Department of Justice.

Purpose To provide outside advice and recommendations to the DOJ on policy and programmatic issues. To coordinate internal departmental efforts and execute specific operational and enforcement tasks.

Transparency Must adhere to strict transparency rules, including public meeting notices, open meetings, and public access to documents and minutes. Not subject to FACA's transparency requirements. Its deliberations and records are not automatically open to the public.

Process Requires a formal charter approval process involving the General Services Administration (GSA), defining its mission, and ensuring balanced membership. Established by internal departmental memorandum and does not require approval from outside bodies or formal public-facing processes.

Why the internal task force was chosen

The decision to create an internal-only task force likely reflects the administration's specific goals: 

• Operational focus: The memo establishing Attorney General Pam Bondi's Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force emphasizes its purpose is to "develop and execut[e] strategies to use litigation and policy". An internal-only task force is ideal for concentrating on specific enforcement actions within the executive branch, rather than seeking broad public input.

• Avoids public oversight: By excluding non-federal employees, the DOJ avoided the open-meeting, public record, and balanced-membership mandates of FACA. This allows it to operate with less public scrutiny.

• No outside influence: Keeping the task force internal prevents the need to balance perspectives from outside advocacy groups, which FACA would require for a public advisory committee. 

While a FACA committee was an option, its public nature and the requirement for balanced viewpoints would have changed the task force's character from an internal enforcement body to a public-facing advisory panel.

Could the DOJ Second Amendment Tak Force invite non-government members to provide input without triggering FACA requirements?

AI Overview

Yes, the DOJ Second Amendment Task Force could invite non-government members to provide input without triggering the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) requirements, provided it follows specific guidelines. The key is to avoid seeking collective advice or recommendations from the non-government individuals as a group. 

What triggers FACA

FACA applies when a federal agency "establishes or utilizes" a group that includes non-federal employees to provide group-based advice or recommendations. The law aims to ensure transparency and public input when agencies get formal advice from outside groups. 

How to obtain non-government input without triggering FACA

The DOJ can still get valuable non-government perspectives by using methods that don't involve soliciting collective advice.

Individual consultation: The task force can meet with non-government experts or stakeholders one-on-one. FACA is not triggered because the input is coming from an individual, not from a committee acting as a group.

Town hall style meeting: The task force can hold a public forum or town hall to hear individual opinions and information. As long as the agency does not ask for group consensus or a collective recommendation, this does not trigger FACA.

Online forums or written submissions: Similar to the town hall method, the DOJ could gather input through a public web portal or by soliciting written comments from individuals.

"Listening tour" approach: Officials can meet with various stakeholders in different locations to understand different perspectives without asking the attendees to function as a single, formal advisory body. 

The risk of FACA being triggered

The line between gathering individual input and seeking collective advice can be blurry and evolve over time.

"Utilizing" a pre-existing group: FACA applies if a federal agency manages or controls an outside, non-governmental group to gather group advice.

Appearance of a formal group: If the DOJ holds recurring, structured meetings with the same group of non-government individuals, and solicits their input on specific questions, it risks creating a de facto advisory committee subject to FACA. 

To remain compliant, the task force would need to be careful to structure its engagement with outside parties to focus on receiving individual perspectives and information rather than group recommendations.

Can the president and attorney general meet occasionally with Second Amendment advocates to hear their views on legislation, rules, legal actions, and appointments they would like to have considered?

AI Overview

Yes, the president and attorney general can and often do meet with Second Amendment advocates and other special interest groups. Executive branch officials engage with these groups to understand their positions, gather information, and build support for their policy agendas. 

President's engagement with special interest groups

A common practice: Engaging with special interest groups is a normal part of the policy-making process for presidents. They meet with representatives from a wide array of groups, including business associations, labor unions, and advocacy organizations, to discuss pending legislation, policy proposals, and public opinion.

Strategic benefits: For a president, these meetings offer an opportunity to mobilize public support, rally political allies, and gather expert input on complex issues. The groups that receive White House access often have substantial resources and share ideological views with the administration.

Transparency and ethics: While direct meetings are common, regulations and ethics pledges are in place to manage the interactions between the executive branch and lobbyists. Some administrations have implemented policies to disclose visitor logs and regulate contact with lobbyists. 

Attorney General's engagement with advocates

Interdepartmental collaboration: The attorney general, as head of the Department of Justice, frequently works with various groups as part of their duties. The DOJ often solicits comments and feedback from advocacy groups, law enforcement, and other stakeholders when proposing new rules or policies.

Legal and policy input: The attorney general may meet with groups to discuss ongoing litigation, review federal regulations, or explore policy strategies. For instance, following the February 2025 executive order on Second Amendment rights, Attorney General Pamela Bondi established a task force and solicited input from affected communities on potential changes to gun-rights policies.

Potential for influence concerns: While such engagement is routine, meetings between high-level officials and special interest groups can sometimes raise concerns about undue influence. These situations have prompted calls for greater transparency and stricter ethical rules. 

Recent example of Second Amendment engagement

As of late 2025, there has been documented communication between the Trump administration and Second Amendment advocates. In February 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing the Attorney General to review federal regulations that might infringe on Second Amendment rights. 

Following this, Attorney General Pam Bondi:

Created a Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force.

Publicly stated that the task force would "protect gun owners from overreach".

Announced a new rule-making process and invited public comments, including from Second Amendment advocates, regarding the restoration of gun rights. 

This recent series of events illustrates how an administration can interact with and incorporate the viewpoints of Second Amendment advocates and other interest groups into its policy actions. 

This is how the Biden admin got around it: They officially appointed activists.

https://marchforourlives.org/impact/white-house-office-of-gun-violence-prevention/

Led by our friends and fellow activists Greg Jackson, formerly the Executive Director of Community Action Justice Fund, Stefanie Feldman, and Rob Wilcox, and overseen by Vice President Kamala Harris, the office has already hit the ground running.

Comments