Information Availability — Week of Mar 2, 2026

This week, two federal government actions raised concerns about public access to information and independent oversight. The Department of Justice proposed a new rule that would let the Attorney General review and intervene in state bar investigations of DOJ lawyers before those investigations can proceed. Separately, the Treasury Department's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency finalized the elimination of a 1979 rule requiring national banks to keep detailed records on home loan applications for fair housing monitoring purposes.

The DOJ proposal is the more consequential of the two. State bar associations are the independent bodies that hold lawyers — including federal prosecutors — accountable for ethical violations. The proposed rule would give DOJ the power to review complaints first and ask state bars to pause their own investigations, with the threat of enforcement action against bars that don't comply. This might matter because independent bar oversight is one of the few checks ensuring federal prosecutors follow ethical rules, and inserting executive control over that process could weaken an accountability mechanism that exists to protect the public from government attorney misconduct. The most likely innocent explanation is that DOJ wants to shield its attorneys from politically motivated complaints arising from their official work — a legitimate concern. But the rule goes further than a shield: it claims a right to review complaints first and threatens state authorities who proceed independently.

The fair housing data rule removes a decades-old requirement for national banks to collect certain home loan data. The OCC says other laws already require similar data collection, making this rule unnecessary. That explanation is plausible — regulatory cleanup is routine. But the OCC itself acknowledges the overlap is not complete, and the original rule was created because existing requirements at the time were considered insufficient for fair housing enforcement.

Limitations: This analysis is based on AI review of publicly available Federal Register documents and represents assessment, not established fact. The DOJ rule is a proposal open for public comment and may change. The practical impact of the OCC rule depends on whether other data collection requirements truly cover the same ground.