Q&A – The FBI’s Use of Force Authorization in the Mar-a-Lago Raid

Q&A of the Day – The FBI’s Use of Force Authorization in the Mar-a-Lago Raid 

Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.     

Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com    

Social: @brianmuddradio   

iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.      

Today’s Entry: @brianmuddradio What’s the real story about the Mar-a-Lago raid? Was the use-of-force authorization unusual?  

Bottom Line: The short answer is that no, the use-of-force authorization in the Mar-a-Lago raid not only wasn’t unusual, but it’s also standard operating procedure. Now, that’s not to say there isn’t more to the story – there is, and I’ll break it all down...but before we go there let’s take a step back from the political perception of this for a minute. If you’re an FBI agent who’s carrying out a search warrant are you going to want to have the ability to use lethal force if necessary? Of course you are right. I’d say most Americans would fully expect that all members of law enforcement, not just the FBI, should have the ability to defend themselves should they come under attack. That basic consideration shouldn’t be the least bit controversial. And that’s why the ability for field agents to use lethal force, if necessary, when conducting search warrants is standard operating procedure. So, about that... 

The US Department of Justice’s Manuel includes details of all standard operations and functions under its jurisdiction. There is a specific section dedicated to this topic entitled: Department of Justice Policy On Use Of Force. The language reads: 

• Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person. 

 As it pertains to FBI agents, that policy applies to all situations whether explicitly stated in an order or not. For example, let’s say hypothetically that a search warrant didn’t explicitly state that use of lethal force is authorized. Does that mean they should just allow themselves to be attacked and perhaps killed if they were to come under attack? Of course not, and that’s part-and-parcel of why it’s standard operating procedure for the Department’s official language to be worked into search warrants. To that end, since the FBI is the federal agency carrying out search warrants on behalf of the federal government, they have their own standard policy posted on their website about the authorization of the use of deadly force. As is stated:  

• FBI special agents may use deadly force only when necessary—when the agent has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the agent or another person. If feasible, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of the special agent is given prior to the use of deadly force. 

The FBI cites the exact language of the Justice Department directive with the added nuances that most commonly apply to their law enforcement actions. That takes us to the specifics of the Mar-a-Lago raid and the situation at hand.  

Given the background we just discussed the FBI’s official response to concerns over the use-of-force authorization in the warrant for the raid isn’t a surprise. It was this:  

• The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter. 

And that’s obviously entirely accurate. There was nothing within the search warrant directive that was at all out of the ordinary regarding the use of force, and if you’re looking to take exception to this situation perhaps that’s the problem.  

Everything we’ve discussed up to this point is policy that’s also common sense (at least for those who still have some). There of course wasn’t anything common about the Mar-a-Lago raid. The biggest argument made against the use of standard operating procedures in the Mar-a-Lago raid is that it wasn’t standard. It’s not just that it was an FBI raid of a former president’s home. As it pertains to the standard “use of force” authorization, it’s that it was already under the protection of another Department of Justice agency – The Secret Service. If there was a time for an explicit change in search warrant instructions regarding force use, this would have been it.  

As we know, the FBI contacted the Secret Service just prior to the raid and there wasn’t an incident. But let’s say for a moment that the message wasn’t received by all agents, or that there was confusion at night in an active scene. In the context of Mar-a-Lago, the only people inside who could have posed a potential lethal threat to the FBI agents carrying out the search warrant would have been the Secret Service agents. And that’s the real storyline here for those who want to take exception to this. If anyone was perhaps unnecessarily placed at risk by using standard FBI operating procedure it was the Secret Service. If there were to be a time in which there were explicit instructions against a standard response as it pertains to force you would have thought that this would have been that time.