The FBI Decided Not To Knock Down a Suspect's Front Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
"This is such outrageous behavior by the FBI," a D.C. Circuit judge says, calling the agency's special treatment of rich people "deeply troubling."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard oral arguments yesterday in United States v. Abou-Khatwa, an insurance fraud case. While most of the argument focused on D.C. insurance broker Tarek Abou-Khatwa's appeal of his 2019 conviction, toward the end Judge Patricia Millett brought up an aspect of the case that troubled her: When FBI agents served a search warrant at Abou-Khatwa's home in Kalorama Heights, a swanky D.C. neighborhood "favored by diplomats and power brokers," there was no answer at the door. But instead of breaching the front door, the agents went around the back to preserve "the aesthetics" of an "affluent neighborhood."
While that issue was not part of Abou-Khatwa's appeal, Millett said, "I found this deeply disturbing." When it became clear that a forced entry was necessary, an FBI agent testified, "the decision was made, since it was an affluent neighborhood," to do it inconspicuously. "Due to the aesthetics of the neighborhood," he said, "we decided to use a rear entrance so as to maintain the integrity of the front of the residence."
Addressing Justice Department attorney Finnuala Tessier, Millett asked, "Are you aware that the FBI has a policy of deciding not to break down the front doors in rich neighborhoods?" Tessier replied that she "was not aware of that." While "I don't mean to blindside you," Millett said, "this is such outrageous behavior by the FBI." If "there really is a policy out there that in nonaffluent neighborhoods we'll break down the front door, but for the rich people we'll go in quietly in the back door," she said, "that's deeply troubling," and "it's shocking to me that it didn't get more attention."
Judge Robert Wilkins thanked Millett for raising the issue. "I was a public defender here for 10 years," he said. "I can't tell you how many times my clients had their front doors bashed in. I don't remember a single time where any agent or police officer was worried about the aesthetics of what their house would look like after they executed a search or arrest."
When Slate's Mark Joseph Stern noted these comments on Twitter, Jabari-Jason Tyson-Phipps, an attorney and former Foreign Service special agent, replied: "I can tell you that is not protocol. The problem is there are two justice systems: 1 for poor people and minorities and 1 for rich people and generally white people. You see it when you are one of the few black agents. Everyone is not equal."
It's not clear whether the FBI agents who searched Abou-Khatwa's house were doing him a favor by eschewing a front-door entry. The agent's testimony makes it sound as if the main concern was the impact that knocking down Abou-Khatwa's front door would have on his wealthy neighbors.
Either way, the rationale suggests that people lucky enough to live in places like Kalorama Heights, where the median household income is about $175,000 and nearly three-quarters of the residents are white, but unlucky enough to attract the FBI's attention can expect better treatment than people who live in, say, Anacostia, where the median household income is about $22,000 and 93 percent of the residents are black. While that would be true regardless of the suspect's race, such a class-based distinction is apt to have a racially disproportionate impact, as Tyson-Phipps notes.
That point aside, the agent's concern about neighborhood "aesthetics," if it reflects a broader practice, means that people who can easily afford to fix the damage caused by an FBI raid are apt to have lower bills than people of modest means who would struggle to cover the expense. It also means that rich people are less likely to be humiliated by a conspicuous front-door entry because it would bother the neighbors.
Tessier, the Justice Department lawyer, did not try to defend the FBI's wealth-based distinction between criminal suspects. "I will pass that on to my management," she said. "I understand the court's concern. I understand why it's upsetting to the court."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Poor" rhymes with "door", something to break.
"Rich" rhymes with "bitch", someone to call your boss.
It's easy to see how they could make those mistakes.
At least this Tessier character was smart enough to shut up and not argue it.
Make law enforcement pay unconditionally for damage caused by executing a search warrant and see how behavior changes.
And post a 24x7 guard until it's fixed.
I truly believe that cops break down unlocked doors hoping that the place will be looted when they leave.
Oh come on, you’re making them sound like dicks or something!
Reason, conspicuous in their silence:
https://twitter.com/DolioJ/status/1512497789539954692?t=Lm8jLVCSF7JGNBQwUJfEWg&s=19
Because it was entrapment.
There was no guilty ideation on the part of the defendants.
The FBI suggested, organized, and advanced the plot, these cats were just too stupid to say no.
Well, one did say no, and the FBI shot and killed him.
[Link]
It's Friday, and there are cocktail parties to attend.
Right, it’s got nothing to do with political affiliation.
Actually, the cocktail parties have everything to do with political affiliation.
"Conspicuous in their silence" by only having a dozen articles I can remember on precisely that case (and making pretty much the same arguments you are)? Or "conspicuous in their silence" because the full-blown article took a few hours more to write than a 140-character tweet?
The problem is there are two editorial systems: Una for poor forumites and Arabic-one for editorial people and generally white people. You see it when you are one of the forumites. Everyone is not equal.
Seriously, Reason, did he really say '1'?
What. a. fucking. shithole.
Was it project Veritas? Did they hide email collection from a special appointed judge? Over a diary?
No convictions in FBI orchestrated Whitmer kidnap plot. 0fer.
The feds got away with it.
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1512500253097926657?t=2HqUIeB6aBKF9AOJ8MomYA&s=19
After 18 months with the judge ruling in their favor on nearly every issue, the DOJ did not get a SINGLE CONVICTION in the alleged plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer
Wwhen I read that the other day I was elated. Four not guiltys and one hung jury.
The FBI must be fuming about this. Someone's gotta pay for this. The judge had better watch himself and those on the jury will be targted by the DOJ.
Defund the FBI!
Arab privilege.
https://twitter.com/ZubyMusic/status/1512429518404964352?t=sDoP4qKQkTQRtlvNWmtdfg&s=19
The word 'lockdown' should not be in everyday parlance and it's a travesty the concept was ever normalised.
Meanwhile: "Literally every Disney employee is a pedophile!"
OK groomer
So? Being poor is a choice. If they just worked harder they would become rich and thus be treated better by the police.
From the roundup - Starting salaries for Walmart truck drivers are now between $95,000 and $110,000, as the industry struggles to attract and retain truckers.
And plenty of choices will keep you poor.
And they will pay for the training of current employees who want to switch to driving trucks.
And if you look around it's not that expensive outside of that. I got mine for $809 from the vocational school in Albuquerque.
What surprises me is that they waited long enough to realize no one was going to answer the door!
Why didn't they just get an agent to pick the lock? Pretty sure the FBI has more than a few lockpickers on staff.
Seriously, "causing damage" should be the exception, not the norm. That cops think breaking & barging through the door is standard practice is a dangerous problem. It goes against innocent until proven guilty.
And...in an insurance fraud case?!
This, and not just the FBI. There are enough simple ways to non-destructively open a door that the damage can only be considered intentional because people are assumed guilty.
I would allow exceptions if there were clear indicators that it would be an articulable reasonable risk to pass enforcement. Of course it might be safer to enter without the chaos that law enforcement intentionally creates during these intrusions.
Lockpicking is not like they show on TV. No, you can't do it with a hairpin. Locksmiths, who have extensive training with locks, require a substantial number of tools and well more than just 10 seconds to pick a lock.
For equity, law enforcement needs to kick in every door.
I'm finding it difficult to believe we're framing the conversation this way.
Yeah, that's really shitty. We need to be happy they didn't kick in this door, and to push for fewer doors to be kicked in, not more.
Also, kill ALL the doggies! Purebred and mongrel alike!!!
That's already in the Cop Code of Deontological Ethics.
Instead of knocking down the door of the rich, how about we STOP knocking down the doors of the poor? Equality in misery is the Soviet way, not the American way. Or is this just some backhanded anti-anti-Putin crap?
No, we have sent a clear message to the FBIGBTQI2+ agencies. If your instinct is to not knock down the door, consider how racist that looks and proceed to knock the Arab's door down. And the front door.
A chicken in every pot!
That is an awfully romantic view of history!
Good point. Conservatives, please explain how altruistic concern justifies breaking, entering, shooting, looting, murder and arson if it's for their own good. I'll watch.
Well said. How about updating the police training so they take proper care to avoid unnecessary damage when raiding any home?
But proper training costs money! It's far better to save money by not training police and then occasionally having to pay out millions in damages, uh...
Not surprising. Firefighters do the same thing. They'll totally destroy your property if in a poor neighborhood whereas if in a rich neighborhood, they'll do their best to not totally trash the property. And before you trolls get started, I've seen it first hand time and time again
Yep. Money doesn't talk, it preaches in the Church of The Almighty Dollar, not those altruist cults of sacrifice and collaborationism.
Yes. That's because homes in poor and rich neighborhoods are actually built differently, and because risks and liabilities are different.
Totally trashing a $100000 home to reduce risks to a firefighter is an easy decision; totally trashing a $5 million home to reduce risk to a firefighter is a much harder decision.
The “sensitivities” of the FBI are passing strange to say the very least.
A Detailed Explanation, in triplicate, should be required.
Yeah, they did not break down Tarek Abou-Khatwa’s door because Tarek Abou-Khatwa was white. Most of the white people I know have names like Tarek Abou-Khatwa.
Abou's door is irrelevant . The important door is the neighbor's door - Biff and Buffy Mayflower.
Have you all forgotten that rich people can afford to sue?
Oh sure they'll probably lose but it may slightly annoy the cops. Poor people can't afford to sue, and can't get a lawyer to represent them for a percentage unless they're injured. Therefore breaking down the doors of poor people, but not rich people, is perfectly logical - if you are a selfish bastard with no respect for other people.....
Let’s not make this a black/white thing when it a rich/poor thing. The suspect in question was Tarek Abou-Khatwa not Skip Biffington of the Connecticut Biffingtons. If Mr. Abou-Khatwa had lived in the projects, they’d have smashed in his front door.
The FBI IS the enemy.
Ah, a fellow Fish Intergalactic Fan Club member. Live long and prosper, but may the sewers of Rangoon back up in the FBI's breakfast cereal!
Another Obama nominee picking on law enforcement officers.
Wilkins, the judge who piled on . . . also an Obama pick.
Where were the solid law-and-order Republican judges when the cops needed them?
Where vices are equivocated into crimes, the result is a class of non-criminals who can afford to buy and sell judges and DAs like so many kilos of cocaine or ounces of that fake narcotic that (unlike LSD) kills so many people. The troubling part is that someone vicious enough to be on the bench as accomplice to the usurpation lacks the wits to understand what is in front of his nose.
So what? That had nothing to do with the appeal. The Judge was grandstanding over an issued that had nothing to do with the matter at hand.
Disaffected, grievance-saturated, antisocial, anti-government cranks with poor judgment and no moral compass are among my favorite culture war casualties.
Carry on, clingers. Your betters will let you know how far and how long, though, naturally.
"This is such outrageous behavior by the FBI," a D.C. Circuit judge says...
So the judge is outraged that the police did NOT destroy someone's front door?
Where I'm from, the authorities used to burn entire neighborhoods to the ground for the crime of being majority black and rich.
It's not about treating the wealthy better, and they just happen to be white, it's about keeping blacks poor and then blaming them for what you did to them.
Well, Tony, and you have obviously been imbued with that kind of racist belief system.
No, Tony, it is about blaming blacks for what YOU and PEOPLE LIKE YOU did to them.
I remember that. First case of an airstrike against a target on American soil by a local government since the 1860s, wasn't it?
Of course, it was a case of black-on-black crime perpetrated by a Democrat, so Wilson Goode suffered no penalties at all for it.
-jcr
Nor did the mayor and police commissioner of Philly who, in May of 1985 , ordered the bombing of the house that was the home of the radical group MOVE which ended with the destruction of houses, fifty to sixty, on both sides of the street of the 6200 block of Osage Ave.
Police are behaving rationally: the probability that they get attacked in what they call an "affluent neighborhood" is simply much, much lower than in many other neighborhoods.
With the exception of the US Marshalls, I don't trust the Feds as far as I can throw them. Serious, deep and systemic reforms are highly needed.
Does every poor person get their door knocked down?
There seem to be a number of assumptions in this case.
They figured out that their target in this case was likely to litigate and win if they didn't go by the book, so they went by the book.
-jcr
Well, the FBI didn't seem to mind raiding the home of Roger Stone at 5:00AM in the morning with CNN(Communist News Network) in tow.
They had no problem breaking the door in with a ram and brandishing high powered firearms in his face either.
Just remember if they can do it to people like Roger Stone what do you think they will do to people like us?
Since Marxist Merrick Garfinkle is head of the DOJ, we should expect an ever expanding number of such raids on any one who might be an enemy of the Bidens.
Including James O'Keef and the crew of Project Veritas and the main office.
Nice work guys. America has become no different than any other police state, especially with the Marxists in the white House and DOJ.
Every single O'Keefe video is a slanderous fraud.
Earth to Republicans: "Journalism" is not defined as "dirt on Democrats."
I’m not familiar with the clause in A1S8 that allows a federal police force to begin with. That’s the real scandal here.
They're special treatment based on politics is more outrageous. Reason is a clown show.
One of the good things about Rudy Guiliani before he went all trumpy is that he was the first SDNY prosecutor to perp-walk white collar criminals. Before Rudy, poor accused criminals were arrested and paraded in front of the news cameras while more affluent white-collar criminals were allowed to voluntarily surrender outside of the view of the cameras.