A controversial DHS report that warned of "right-wing extremism" refuses to surrender its place in the public spotlight. Immediately condemned by veterans' groups and Republican lawmakers after its release in April 2009, the report is now being heralded by some as a timely warning in the wake of several acts of domestic violence that attracted national attention. The initial criticism of the report led to its withdrawal and triggered a House resolution exploring its creation. 

The report, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" ignited a firestorm of controversy after warning of increased risk from "radicalized, rightwing extremists" including those who oppose abortion, illegal immigration, and disgruntled veterans. After the backlash toward the report intensified, Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano testified before the House's Homeland Security Committee that "the wheels came off the wagon because the vetting process was not followed." The report was withdrawn in May 2009.

The commander of the American Legion, David K. Rehbein, who had been one of the most vocal critics of the report, said that the report's withdrawal "validates our objections" and "was an unfair and unsubstantiated stereotype based on Timothy McVeigh." 

On May 6, 2009, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) introduced a resolution that would direct Napolitano to produce the documents that led to the creation of the report. The House's Committee on Homeland Security Chairman, Bennie Thompson (D-MS) initially voiced concerns over the report, but on May 19 offered an amended version of the resolution that softened some of the original language but did not alter the resolution's intent.  The Committee adopted the amended resolution by a voice vote.  It has yet to be voted upon by the full House.

If passed by the House, the amended Resolution 404, would give DHS 14 days to provide Congress with the following information:

• all of the materials used in drafting the assessment
• written material indicating when the assessment began
• a written description of the clearance processes before and after those processes were changed by DHS
• a schedule of DHS Intelligence employee training for privacy and civil liberties
• any written information on the internal controls for intelligence assessments at the department since the processes have been changed.