*** 11/19/25 - The DOJ Is Broken. What Happens Now?........................
Buzz Sawyer
The DOJ Is Broken. What Happens Now?
The US attorney general or the president’s personal lawyer?
Photographer: Alex Wong/Getty Images North America
At the US Department of Justice, hundreds of lawyers have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. As the Trump administration puts its stamp on this once-vaunted agency, the question is, what comes next?
According to reporting by the New York Times, whose reporters spoke with 60 former DOJ staff members, “The administration has taken away safeguards that protected the agency from political influence. Trump officials have directed criminal investigations that would usually have nothing to do with the White House. They’ve ignored ethics rules and told attorneys to drop cases.” As a result, the department’s culture of independence and impartiality has shattered.” Last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the Department is at “war” with judges who rule against Trump’s initiatives — a breathtaking assault on judicial independence and the rule of law.
Said one former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Division, “If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.”
On Monday, a federal judge criticized the work of Lindsey Halligan, an underqualified Trump appointee serving as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Trump appointed Halligan after firing her predecessor, Erik Seibert, who refused to indict former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Halligan, a former insurance lawyer and White House aide, had never served as a prosecutor, and it shows. The judge in the Comey case made the rare decision to release grand jury transcripts to the defense so that they could challenge Halligan’s questionable conduct before the grand jury.
As a former Justice Department attorney, I can see the damage even from the outside. The post-Watergate norms that once insulated the DOJ from politics are now shattered. Communications between the White House and Department lawyers were once strictly limited to prevent even the appearance of political influence in legal matters.
Today, we see President Donald Trump openly demanding prosecutions of his perceived enemies on social media. Since the 1970s, the DOJ’s Principles of Federal Prosecution have prohibited prosecutors from considering a person’s “political associations, activities or beliefs” in making case decisions, and we followed that rule. It is difficult to believe that current Justice Department leaders are complying with this basic standard when they order the dismissal of charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams to coerce his cooperation in immigration enforcement, or when they pursue indictments against Comey and James after career prosecutors recommended against charging them. As one former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division put it, “I wouldn’t even call it the Justice Department anymore. It’s become Trump’s personal law firm.” The conduct of some DOJ lawyers has even led some judges to no longer afford the government the presumption of regularity it once enjoyed.
In addition to politicizing charging decisions, the Trump administration has also targeted DOJ personnel. The purge of employees who worked on cases the administration dislikes — such as the prosecutions of Jan. 6 attackers or Trump himself — appears to violate federal law. Since the late 1800s, civil service laws have protected employees from termination without just cause, enabling our government to develop expertise and institutional knowledge. Prosecutors who handle terrorism, cyber security and countless other sensitive cases require a deep understanding of the threats posed by adversaries. They also need trusted relationships with counterparts in allied nations to protect American interests. A Justice Department that purges its best and brightest in retaliation for performing their jobs loses the experience that helps safeguard our nation. Moreover, top legal talent will no longer pursue the once-coveted positions at the DOJ, fearing they, too, could be cast out in the next administration.
One has to wonder who would apply for a job in an administration that might fire them for refusing to follow its political agenda, ethical obligations be damned. Would it be those who share the president’s partisan agenda? Or those unable to find jobs elsewhere? Either way, the nation would not be well-served by having such individuals in positions of power.
It seems unlikely that anything will change until we have a new president. What, then, should the next administration do to right the ship? Should it return to nonpartisan norms and retain employees hired during the Trump administration — even those who share this president’s partisan agenda? Should the 48th president allow Kash Patel to serve his full statutory 10-year term as FBI director, despite allegations that he conducted a “campaign of retribution” against senior FBI officials for failing to “demonstrate sufficient political loyalty” ? Or would the next administration be better served by conducting its own purge of Trump loyalists? If so, how should DOJ leaders identify them? By assuming anyone hired during his administration is suspect?
There are no easy answers. The best approach might be to consider a two-tiered solution. Employees who engaged in unethical or partisan political activity while serving at the Department are out — fired for cause for violating the Principles of Federal Prosecution. Political appointees, like Patel, must go. Other employees hired during the Trump administration should remain.
Even at the risk of keeping some individuals hired more for their political views than their qualifications, their retention would be a modest but meaningful step toward restoring the Department’s independence from political influence. Public confidence in the Department’s integrity is essential to its success in the courtroom. And, perhaps most importantly, the DOJ should strive to bring back some of the talent lost to the Trump-era purge — though some may understandably be unwilling to risk another politically-motivated termination.
Attracting and retaining highly qualified lawyers who are committed to ethical obligations is an important first step toward repairing the damage done to the Justice Department during the Trump administration. But restoring its former quality and reputation will likely take decades.