CHARLESTON – A nonprofit group says nearly $90,000 in advertising spent by U.S. Attorney Mike Stuart’s office seems to support Stuart’s personal policy preference.
“An unelected federal bureaucrat spent taxpayer money to oppose a state-level policy position,” Americans For Prosperity-West Virginia Director Jason Huffman told The West Virginia Record. “As taxpayers, we want to understand why that decision was made.
“We’re not trying to take personal shots at anybody. We’re just trying to hold a government official accountable about a decision to spend taxpayer money.”
Huffman
In response, Stuart said he’s been as open as any U.S. attorney about how his office operates.
“I can’t comment because of the pending litigation,” Stuart told The Record. “I would really like to comment and, at the appropriate time, I will for sure – extensively. PSAs (Public Service Announcements) are used by U.S. Attorneys across the nation, and they can be an important tool to communicate with the public.
“I may be the most transparent U.S. Attorney in the nation.”
AFPWV filed a lawsuit last month in federal court claiming Stuart failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request. The Americans For Prosperity Foundation says it made a FOIA request regarding a PSA conducted by Stuart’s office that it claims advocated against state-level lawmakers’ successful efforts to begin reforming West Virginia’s broken criminal justice system.
“One of the most important traits of our republic is allowing the public access to information regarding decisions made by government officials,” Huffman said then. “Failure to produce records when requested runs counter to an open and transparent government, which is essential for protecting and upholding our constitutional rights.
“In this instance, we are seeking to learn more about the decision of an unelected federal bureaucrat to spend taxpayer money advocating against state-level policy decisions. This information we’re seeking is clearly within the parameters of a FOIA request. It is imperative that the government provides citizens their rightful access to this information so they can see how their tax dollars are being spent.”
Stuart dismissed the lawsuit, calling it frivolous.
“I am not going to comment on this frivolous lawsuit,” Stuart told The Record then. “This is merely a personal attack against a very successful U.S. Attorney. We understand that if you’re uber successful as I’ve been as U.S. Attorney, you’ll always be the target of personal attacks. I take it as a tremendous compliment.”
According to the complaint, Stuart’s office ran radio ads “opposing criminal justice reforms in West Virginia.”
Records show his office had a contract for at least $86,730 with West Virginia MetroNews. AFPF also said email records obtained through its FOIA seem to indicate that Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs was bothered that Stuart was running PSAs without their prior approval. It also says one email shows Stuart forwarding records to a redacted address, raising concerns that he may be using a personal e-mail account for government business.
Stuart’s office produced 90 pages of documents for AFPF on July 24.
“Transparency is critical for the people to hold government officials accountable,” Huffman said. “Unfortunately, the Department of Justice is reluctant to bring key records and information to light on U.S. Attorney Mike Stuart’s office decision to use taxpayer money to pay for radio ads pushing his personal policy preferences opposing state criminal justice reforms.
“The records may be incomplete and key information could be missing that prevents West Virginians from seeing the decision-making process on how a federal official was spending U.S. taxpayer dollars. From the lack of a sincere, adequate, and timely response to citizens’ request for records, there is cause for much concern on how this U.S. Attorney’s office respects West Virginians’ rights to more transparency. We urge the U.S. Attorney’s office to release the full documents without redactions to help West Virginians better understand how these ads were produced.”
According to the complaint, the ad in question argues that law enforcement is effectively fighting crime but not because ‘we’re hugging the bad guys’ and warns ‘bail reform and other social justice initiative threaten to reverse course.’”
“It adds that ‘revolving doors from arrests to the street only embolden criminal activity.’ It imagines that ‘there’s only one way to kill a snake, you gotta take the head completely off.’
“The ad concludes with ‘this is no time to go soft on crime.’ The narrator identifies himself: ‘I’m Mike Stuart, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia, and I’ll keep fighting for us to keep winning.’”
The complaint says Stuart’s office also issued a press release about the public service ads, which were ran during the legislative session when lawmakers were “considering several important bills, some of which touched on issues in Stuart’s narrative.”
“Many of these reform bills passed the state Legislature, aiding citizens and helping to re-integrate people into society,” the complaint states.
The group says it sent a FOIA request April 1 seeking more information about the ads, including any emails from Stuart and his direct reports about the ads, any emails from Stuart and his direct reports to members of the Legislature, staffers or the governor and his staffers. They also sought information about the cost of the ads and money used to pay for the ads.
On April 3, the Department of Justice denied the request. The request was re-opened, but no information has been released to the group as of today’s filing.
The AFPF requests an order for the DOJ to process the FOIA request and produce all responsive records. It also asks the court to make sure the DOJ complies with the order. It also seeks court costs, attorney fees and other relief.
The AFPF bills itself as a nonpartisan organization committed to educating citizens about the value of limited government and a free market economy.
The group is being represented by its attorneys Eric R. Bolinder and Ryan P. Mulvey.
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia case number 1:20-cv-01848