Justice said Pelley’s approach was “callous” and “lacked empathy” during an interview that focused on Moms for Liberty’s claim that the Biden administration had launched an investigation into the group. The conversation, according to an alleged transcript obtained by the Daily Mail, became tense as Justice and Pelley disputed whether the FBI had contacted one of the organization’s supporters.
Moms for Liberty is a right-wing organization that campaigns against school materials mentioning LGBTQ rights, race and ethnicity, critical race theory, and discrimination. The Southern Poverty Law Center has included the group on its “hate map,” describing it as a “far-right organization” that engages in anti-student inclusion activities.
In the alleged exchange, Justice claimed that an FBI agent contacted a mother in the group’s network, which she presented as evidence of what she called a “blatant disregard for parental rights.” Pelley pushed back strongly, saying the FBI does not call people but visits them, and accused Justice of making a false claim. Justice responded that he had not done his research.
Pelley insisted he was informed on the issue and did not accept Justice’s version of events. Justice then said that the FBI had called a parent on the phone and pointed to testimony she had given before Congress in March, saying she had the transcript available if he wanted to read it. Pelley replied that the alleged incident “didn’t happen,” saying it strained credibility.
As the exchange continued, Justice reportedly told Pelley she would stop the line of questioning because she did not want to embarrass him. Pelley answered that he was not embarrassed, but again denied that the event had occurred.
The disputed interview highlights the broader political controversy surrounding Moms for Liberty and its claims of government scrutiny. The organization has become a prominent voice in fights over school curriculum and parental rights, drawing both support from conservatives and criticism from advocacy groups that accuse it of promoting exclusionary policies.
The exchange also underscores the deep divisions over how schools should address topics such as race, gender, and sexuality, as well as the growing tension between activist groups and journalists covering their claims.
