Congressional Oversight and DOJ Ethics

Part I: Congress and the Executive branch

1. What powers does Congress have over agencies in the executive branch? Where can one find these authorized powers?

The U.S. Constitution does not establish executive agencies nor provides guidelines for how they can be created. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that Congress has implied authority to establish and manage executive agencies. The most felt and often practices power the Congress has over administrative agencies is an oversight. Congressional oversight by the U.S. Congress over administrative agencies and the administrative branch, in general, includes the monitoring, review, and supervision of these agencies (Garvey & Sheffner, 2018). Congressional oversight is largely exercised through the congressional committee system through legislative hearings. Oversight can also be through various activities and contexts undertaken by Congress, including appropriations, authorization, investigation, and studies and reviews done by congressional staff and support agencies.

The powers to oversight executive agencies are derived from its implied powers from the U.S. Constitution, the House and Senate Rules, and public laws. In particular, the Congress may utilize Article I lawmaking power (Garvey & Sheffner, 2018) to establish executive agencies and specific offices within those agencies, design the basic structures and operations of those agencies, and assign how holders of those offices are appointed and removed in line with specific constitutional limitations (Feinstein, 2017).

2. If Congress feels that an executive branch federal agency has failed to comply with policies, procedures, and standards, what can they do about this situation?

Once Congress has concerns about the operations of any executive agency, there are various ways to go about conducting oversight. In the case Congress has concerns that an executive agency, e.g., the leadership of the Federal Department of Justice, has possibly engaged in inappropriate communications with a foreign power in violation of departmental policy, the initial step is to determine three crucial questions; which issues warrant oversight, how to get the desired information, and what is to be done with the acquired information (Congressional Research Service, 2021). The process of determining these three questions would involve the relevant congressional committee; in this case, the issues fall under both the Judiciary committee as well as the foreign affairs committee; thus, it is suggested that the hearing committee would be made up of a combination of the two standing committees (Oleszek et al., 2016). The role of the committee would be investigative. The committee would hear from the leadership of the DOJ through the various tools at the disposal of the committee, including deposition and subpoena. The information gathered would subsequently be used to determine the policy infringements and the relevant punitive measures to undertake, including censure or impeachment...

Read through the Ethics Handbook for On and Off Duty Conduct from the DOJ and the DOJ Ethics Scenario, located in the Resources. As an employee of the DOJ, are you able to accept any gifts or compensation for any services rendered to various individuals or groups? Explain.

As an employee of the DOJ, the general principle is not to accept any gift(s) resulting from the employees professional services rendered to the source, various individuals, or groups unless prior approval for such gift or compensation has been received. According to the Ethics Handbook for On and Off Duty Conduct for the DOJ (2016), no employee is allowed to solicit or accept a gift given based on the employees position or from a source prohibited. Prohibited sources are those that; seek official action or business with the DOJ, and thus, the gift amounts to a bride, are regulated by the department, would present a conflict of interest, and an organization made up of persons described above. However, an employee can accept a gift if it is clear it is based on a personal relationship. The motivation is to official position, the gift value per occasion is less than $20, and gifts from the source do not exceed $50 per year, if the gift is offered to a broad class of government employees, and if the gift is a genuine award or honorary degree based on public service and prior approval has been given. Based on this understanding and the case presented, it would be ethical to accept the free entry to the evenings dance performance and the $150 honorarium (assuming that this had prior approval and because it doesnt exceed $350).

2. Why do you think the DOJ has implemented such policies? Are those policies in keeping with the policies, procedures, and standards that were authorized by the enabling legislation of Congress? Explain. (comp. 3.2)

The DOJ policies on gifts have been implemented, with the primary objective being to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. The policies help DOJ employees to avoid situations where their official actions and services would affect or appear to affect their private interests, non-financial or financial. The policies also help to do away with potential bribery for services offered by the DOJ and thus promote the impartiality standard (DOJ, 2016).

The policies on accepting gifts are more of an ethics issue, and for the U.S. government, ethics are specific deparments. The U.S. Congress also has its specific policies on acceptance of gifts for Members of the Congress as contained in the…