Full federal investigation into sex abuse in SBC ends with no additional criminal charges
A historic federal investigation into sexual abuse within the nation's largest Protestant denomination is officially over after yielding just one conviction.
The U.S. Department of Justice notified the Southern Baptist Convention it's not pursuing additional criminal charges against the convention or SBC-affiliated agencies, called entities. The news confirms earlier speculation surrounding the conclusion of a case last week when a federal judge in Manhattan sentenced former Southern Baptist pastor and seminary professor Matt Queen, who pleaded guilty to lying to federal authorities.
But some abuse survivors and allies' hope for more serious criminal proceedings evaporated with the news of the inquiry's official conclusion. The SBC Executive Committee, which manages business for the Nashville-based denomination outside the two-day SBC annual meeting, confirmed the news in response to a request for comment.
'We're grateful that we can close this chapter in our legal proceedings and move forward,' Jeff Iorg, chief executive for the SBC Executive committee, said in a statement Wednesday.
One of the likeliest charges to apply in this scenario would have dealt with racketeering, commonly referred to as a RICO case — an abbreviation for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Unless there was trafficking across state lines, the prosecution of most incidents of clergy sex abuse is under the jurisdiction of state attorneys general or local district attorneys.
A May 2022 report from third-party investigator Guidepost Solutions on cover-up and neglect by top Southern Baptist leaders prompted the DOJ to pursue an investigation across the denomination and its 11 major entities, which are based in different states. But the SBC's hierarchy — local churches, regional associations and state conventions are autonomous and voluntary partners with the national convention — long presented a dilemma for a RICO prosecution, for example.
'Churches must remain vigilant,' Megan Lively, an abuse survivor whom the FBI interviewed as part of the DOJ investigation, said in a statement Wednesday. 'A report from the DOJ does not automatically make your church safe.'
Explainer early on: What it means for the Southern Baptist Convention to be under federal investigation for abuse
The SBC Executive Committee announced 18 months after the federal investigation began in August 2022 the administrative entity was no longer a target of the DOJ investigation, sowing confusion among survivors who said FBI agents were reassuring them an inquiry remained underway.
Soon after, U.S. attorneys announced charges against Queen related to a January 2023 incident at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, where Queen was an interim administrator. The incident involved another seminary administrator named Heath Woolman instructing dean Terri Stovall to destroy evidence containing information about an abuse report. Queen later lied about what he witnessed Woolman tell Stovall.
Federal prosecutors did not pursue charges against Woolman, despite questions about whether Woolman's reported actions violated a grand jury subpoena requiring SBC entities' staff to retain documents containing information about abuse reports. With the DOJ concluding its investigation, it also means that subpoena is closed.
Although the DOJ inquiry is now over, the fact the investigation happened in the first place was historically significant. Though state attorneys general have launched inquiries into sex abuse in the Catholic Church, federal prosecutors have never investigated a major religious denomination for the same reason.
Liam Adams covers religion for The Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at ladams@tennessean.com or on social media @liamsadams.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: DOJ inquiry into SBC abuse ends with no additional criminal charges
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Justice Department calls Newsom National Guard lawsuit a ‘crass political stunt'
The Trump administration is urging a federal judge to reject California Gov. Gavin Newsom's bid to block the military from supporting immigration enforcement activities in Los Angeles, calling the lawsuit a 'crass political stunt' and warning that the restraining order Newsom wants would endanger federal personnel. 'That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous,' Justice Department lawyers said in a response delivered to San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer Wednesday. In a pointed, 32-page filing replete with political overtones, the administration contended that Trump's decision to deploy the military to help suppress unrest — stemming from ICE raids and arrests taking place across Los Angeles — is entirely within his authority as commander-in-chief, and unreviewable by the court. Breyer, a Clinton appointee, is set to hold a hearing Thursday afternoon on Newsom's request. The governor initially asked the court to block the deployment within two hours, but the judge agreed to a Justice Department request for 24 hours to respond. Trump has authorized the Pentagon to call up nearly 4,000 members of California's National Guard contingent on a mission to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities and personnel. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles. Though federal law generally bars the use of the military to enforce domestic laws, Trump invoked a provision that permits him to call up National Guard troops to protect federal property and personnel when there is a 'rebellion' or 'danger of rebellion.' The Justice Department described the chaotic situation on the ground over the weekend as 'mobs resisting federal authority in a manner that rises to the level of rebellion,' although city and state officials have emphasized that the unrest has impacted only a few relatively small parts of the sprawling metropolis. DOJ lawyers also urged Breyer not to second-guess the president's assessment that military support was needed. Newsom's claim that the law required Trump to consult him before issuing such an order is both wrong and dangerous, DOJ lawyers argued, because it would give state officials an effective veto of the president's military judgment. DOJ attorneys also dismissed as speculative the state's concern that the National Guard or military forces would take part in law enforcement. Images taken on the streets of Los Angeles Tuesday showed Guard forces standing watch as immigration enforcement officers detained and searched potential deportees. The administration argued that those troops were there to protect ICE officials, a distinct mission from carrying out immigration arrests. Justice Department lawyers salted their brief with a series of thinly-veiled political shots at Newsom, speculating that California officials might be 'unwilling' to put a stop to the violence. Two days after Trump suggested Newsom's arrest, the brief also suggests perhaps the governor had broken the law by failing to pass on Trump's order to state Guard officials, although those troops have responded to the president's directive. 'Even if Plaintiffs' interpretation of the statute were correct, the only party acting unlawfully would be Governor Newsom — not President Trump or Secretary Hegseth,' the attorneys wrote. And the Justice Department also quoted Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who recently criticized fellow Democrats over their posture toward the unrest. The DOJ brief also draws an analogy sure to grate on Newsom: comparing him to Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, who sought to use that state's National Guard to resist court-ordered school desegregation in the 1950s. The federal statute Trump invoked 'affords no veto to Governor Newsom over the President's decision to call forth the guard, just as it afforded no veto to Governor Faubus when President Eisenhower last invoked the predecessor [statute] to ensure that the enforcement of federal law was not obstructed,' DOJ lawyers wrote.
New York Post
24 minutes ago
- New York Post
Congress demands investigation into billionaire funding radical groups, including one linked to LA riots
A shadowy US billionaire who is bankrolling radicals, including groups involved in this week's riots in Los Angeles, faces being hauled before a Congressional committee, according to a Republican lawmaker. China-based Neville Roy Singham will be called to testify about his funding of myriad non-profits including radical anti-Israel and Marxist groups. They include the Party for Liberation and Socialism, which has been heavily involved in protest against US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Los Angeles this week, although there is no evidence they have been directly involved in any of the violence which has erupted there. Advertisement 6 The Party for Socialism and Liberation was among the radical left-wing groups that helped organize the riots against ICE in Los Angeles this week. Toby Canham for NY Post 'If he refuses to appear, he will be subpoenaed, and if he ignores that he will be referred to the DOJ for prosecution,' said Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna in a post on X in all capital letters earlier this week. The congressional committee will be looking at Singham's links to the Chinese Communist Party, according to Luna. Advertisement 6 Radical philanthropists Jodie Evans (center) and husband Roy Singham attend the 2016 TriBeCa film fstival with film producer Abigail Disney. WireImage 6 Elias Rodriguez, the suspect in the murder of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington DC, participated in an anti-police brutality demonstration organized by the Party for Socialism and Liberation in 2017. Katie Kalisher via Storyful In April, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary urged the Department of Justice to investigate the People's Forum and Code Pink, leftist activist groups affiliated with Singham and his wife Jodie Evans. Born in Chicago, the software entrepreneur and his activist wife now live in Shanghai but still funnel plenty of money back to the US. Advertisement Although they deny working for the Chinese government, they share offices with the Maku Group, a propaganda network which promotes the Chinese Communist Party abroad. 6 Jodie Evans is a co-founder of Code Pink, a women's anti-war group that also promotes North Korea. Getty Images for MoveOn 'Evidence suggests that The People's Forum and Code Pink have been funded and influenced by … Singham and the communist Chinese government, both of which are foreign principals. 'The evidence also suggests that The People's Forum and Code Pink have engaged in political activities that directly advance the communist Chinese government's political and policy interests,' said committee chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Advertisement 6 Republican Representative Anna Paulina Luna has demanded that Neville Singham appear before her Oversight Committee to answer questions about his links to the Chinese Communist Party. AP Last year, the House Ways and Committee asked the IRS to revoke the exempt status for the People's Forum, a Manhattan-based non-profit financed by Singham. That group helped organize anti-Israel demonstrations in the city a day after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel that left 1,200 Israelis dead. Some of the group's members were also behind the violent demonstrations at an encampment for Gaza at Columbia University last year. 'The Singham network operates as a coordinated movement incubator, a term used by the People's Forum itself,' said Alex Goldberg, senior advisor to the National Contagion Research Institute, a think tank that tracks disinformation on social media platforms. 'It combines media, publishing and organizing under one roof.' Most of the groups linked to Singham operate out of a Chelsea, New York, office and cafe where People's Forum regularly offers courses with titles such as 'Racial Capitalism' and 'Spanish for Social Justice.' 6 The protests against ICE in Los Angeles this week were partly organized by the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Toby Canham for NY Post Among the Singham-linked non-profits are BreakThrough News and a radical book publishing company, 1804 Books. Advertisement 'These groups do not operate independently,' Goldberg told The Post. 'They share leadership, funding, and a unified ideological mission closely aligned with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, a revolutionary Marxist organization, expanding its presence on college campuses and in major cities.' The Party for Socialism and Liberation was recently tied to Elias Rodriguez, the suspect in the shooting deaths of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington DC last month. In 2017, Rodriguez attended a police brutality demonstration as part of the radical socialist group, which immediately distanced itself from him in the wake of the shooting. Singham, 71, has not always been against the accumulation of capital. He is the founder and former chair of Thoughworks, a tech consulting company which he sold to a private equity firm in 2017 for $785 million. 'Roy Singham is incredibly charismatic,' said a source who did not want to be identified. Advertisement Evans, 70, co-founded the anti-war group Code Pink, and sits on the board of the People's Forum. She is the co-author of 'China is not our enemy,' written with Mikaela Nhondo Erskog, a researcher at another group funded by Singham. In another extreme example, Evans and another activist with Code Pink traveled to North Korea in 2015 as part of a delegation of 'Women Cross DMZ,' a pro-North Korean non-profit based in Hawaii.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SEC scrubbed guidance on DEI in asset manager selection from website
The Securities and Exchange Commission has purged guidance from its website regarding fund manager diversity, but it was hard to find even before President Donald Trump's second term. That pullback from promoting diversity, equity and inclusion in asset management comes as part of the Trump administration's executive orders targeting "DEI" programs. And it underscores the confusing current state of federal efforts to ensure that more women- and minority-owned fund firms get a fair shot at doing business with large government pensions and retirement plans. For advocates, such programs open doors to capital and to rewarding careers as financial advisors or wealth and asset management professionals and, in some cases, the enforcement of crucial civil rights laws. To Trump's supporters, DEI has expanded access for some at the expense of others, to the point that consideration of factors involving race, gender and other identities has turned more important than merit in, say, hiring or the awarding of contracts. The SEC has removed an October 2022 "frequently asked questions" memo explaining how the fiduciary duty applies to the use of DEI criteria in the selection of asset managers, according to a recent study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, an independent watchdog agency that reports to Congress. The SEC issued the FAQ during President Joe Biden's administration, at which time critics questioned its importance and obscure previous location on the agency's website. Now, with so many aspects related to DEI in administrative or legal limbo, the way forward after small but notable progress in opportunities for women and minority financial professionals looks anything but clear. "I'm optimistic, and that's because we've seen this movie before," said Dorien Nuñez, the president and director of research with consulting firm OMNI Research Group and co-founder of OMNI Wall Street Advantage, a chartered financial analyst training, mentoring and internship organization. He cited the Reagan administration's unsuccessful push to eliminate the Small Business Administration in the 1980s. "This is definitely more aggressive," Nuñez said. "ESG is flourishing globally. DEI is flourishing globally. It's just the political will and megaphone that is fighting against it so much, so vocally." For impact managers whose strategies seek to close wealth gaps through clients' investment portfolios, the administration's anti-DEI actions are "really hampering their marketing efforts" and capital-raising, said Will Gholston, a CFA and certified financial planner who is the vice president of investments with New York-based registered investment advisory firm Re-Envision Wealth. At this point, any fund manager "would definitely think twice before bringing that type of product to market in this environment," he said. "I am currently at a Black-owned firm that's made racial equity investing the centerpiece of our strategies," Gholston said. "You have to be much more cautious in the way that you design products, the way that you talk about products. There is that risk that you're going to be in trouble." READ MORE: Which publicly traded firms have the best and worst racial equity grades? Representatives for the SEC didn't respond to inquiries about the removal of the guidance from its website or the findings of the GAO report, which updated the watchdog's 2017 study on asset manager diversity and came at the request of Democratic lawmakers three years ago. The dearth of assets managed by women- or minority-owned firms received more attention following the 2020 murder of George Floyd as part of the industry's response to the nationwide protests. The GAO found some signs of change at certain pension plans and across the industry. Five federal pensions told the researchers that 61 women- or minority-owned asset managers were overseeing a combined $4.06 billion on their behalf at the end of 2022 — but that was still only 2.8% of the externally managed assets across the plans. On the other hand, that is a far higher share than in asset management in general. As of 2023, the industry-wide assets managed by women- and minority-owned firms had ticked up to 1.1% from less than 1% in 2017. However, that tiny blip added up to a total of $1.3 trillion in assets managed by 340 firms, compared to $529 billion at just 180 firms only six years earlier. That's a 146% surge in assets, or a difference of $771 billion in AUM, and an 89% jump in the net increase of 160 more firms with some degree of ownership by women or Black, Hispanic, Asian American or other minority group members. READ MORE: DOGE cuts to fair housing grants hit HOME for financial advisor The ramifications of Trump's DEI orders to the SEC remain difficult to ascertain, based on the agency's website. The conservative Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 policy blueprint for Trump's administration called for the SEC to end "discrimination based on immutable characteristics" in the form of "offices at financial regulators that promote racist policies (usually in the name of 'diversity, equity, and inclusion')." And, in February, SEC staff informed GAO researchers that they had taken down the previous guidance about "investment advisers' consideration of DEI factors when recommending or selecting other advisers" based on Trump's executive orders in the previous month, the GAO report said. "As a result, we removed our assessment of this guidance from our review," the report's authors, Director of Financial Markets and Community Involvement Michael Clements and Director of Education, Workforce and Income Security Tranchau "Kris" Nguyen wrote. "SEC staff also told us that they were analyzing the potential impact of the executive orders on their activities related to promoting and collecting diversity policies and practices through SEC's diversity self-assessment form for its regulated entities." The link to the 2022 FAQ now goes to a "403 error" page. But still available are the "Diversity self-assessment tool" for regulated entities, a bare section explaining the purposes of the SEC Office of Minority and Women Inclusion under the Dodd-Frank Law and a statement by two commissioners praising the now-purged guidance. The report, which stated that the GAO hasn't "determined the scope and effect of the January 2025 executive orders or their impact on SEC programs and activities" didn't include any information about what specifically made the FAQ out of compliance with Trump's executive orders. "Staff from SEC's Division of Investment Management issued this guidance to clarify that investment advisers may consider DEI factors when recommending or selecting other advisers, such as asset management firms, provided that doing so is consistent with the client's objectives, the scope of the relationship and the adviser's disclosures," Clements and Nguyen wrote in a footnote. READ MORE: Fighting systemic racism with estate planning — one client at a time Even before Trump took office, some industry experts wondered what, if anything, to conclude from the FAQ. The guidance "raises more questions than it answers," according to a November 2022 blog by consulting firm Patomak Global Partners entitled "The Curious Case of the Hidden FAQ." The SEC issued no corresponding public announcement about the guidance, the blog noted. And the agency didn't even include the FAQ alongside others available in the FAQ section of its website. In fact, the mere existence of the guidance may not have become publicly known without two of the commissioners releasing the statement. And any asset allocators or managers would have found it difficult to use in the first place, according to Patomak, which described it as "a check-the-box exercise to implement a controversial recommendation." "Even if an adviser stumbled upon the FAQ," the blog continued, "it does not provide helpful guidance as to how an adviser can incorporate DEI factors into its selection or recommendation of other advisers consistent with its fiduciary duty to clients. Investment advisers should be wary of overreliance on this FAQ. Staff FAQs have no legal force or effect and do not alter or amend applicable law, given that they represent the views of SEC staff, not the Commission. Choosing an investment adviser with a short track record or minimal AUM can open an investment adviser to significant liability in the event of subpar performance or an incident of defalcation, a problem this nonbinding FAQ is unlikely to solve, particularly in light of the fact that it contains no guidance on how to balance these competing concerns." READ MORE: How financial advisors can help close the racial wealth gap Regardless, advocates like Nuñez and Gholston will continue their work in any political climate — and welcome collaboration from other industry professionals in the mission to increase opportunities and align clients' portfolios to their principles. "The short answer is, contact me," Nuñez said. "Some of us have been out here doing this for decades, and we're now working closer together than before. But it is very fragmented." Taking down the guidance is "definitely a move in the wrong direction" by the SEC, but efforts to increase women- and minority representation in asset management "have been so inadequate to date that there's not much room to decline," Gholston said. And that has spanned Democratic and Republican administrations, he pointed out. The underlying trends in the investing marketplace aren't going away in Trump's second term, according to Gholston. "The desire for greater fairness and a level playing field in the investment management world has not declined amongst the populace, the investment world and our clients," he said. "It's very likely that, over the long term, we're going to see a renewed effort in this space." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
