Former DOJ ethics official sounds off on Bondi exit; CNN, April 3, 2026

CNN; Former DOJ ethics official sounds off on Bondi exit

"A former Justice Department ethics official fired by Pam Bondi last year speaks out on her departure."

That Was Fast: Bondi’s Portrait Already Living At The Dump; Above The Law, April 3, 2026

 Kathryn Rubino , Above The Law; That Was Fast: Bondi’s Portrait Already Living At The Dump

From the wall to the bin in minutes, with a karmic assist from her own management style.

"Pam Bondi’s tenure as attorney general didn’t just end abruptly, it ended curbside.

Because in a bit of poetic efficiency that would make even the most overworked line prosecutor crack a smile, Bondi’s official DOJ portrait was reportedly spotted in the trash mere minutes after Donald Trump gave her the boot. Just straight to the bin, like last week’s takeout and this week’s credibility."

The One Thing Trump Wanted That Pam Bondi Failed to Deliver; The New York Times, April 2, 2026

Jeffrey Toobin , The New York Times; The One Thing Trump Wanted That Pam Bondi Failed to Deliver

"But the core of Mr. Trump’s dissatisfaction with the attorney general was apparently her failure to serve his need for revenge against his enemies. She did not prosecute enough of Mr. Trump’s adversaries, and the cases she did bring were failures...

The worst consequence of the Justice Department’s pursuit of cases involving otherwise law-abiding but undocumented individuals is that it has led to untold suffering among those targeted, their families and the economies they support. Ms. Bondi’s lawyers have spent considerable time and money on the harassment, and worse, of people who have done no harm to anyone...

Perhaps worst of all, Justice Department lawyers under Ms. Bondi have often behaved in shockingly unethical ways. For decades, federal judges have looked at assistant U.S. attorneys and other Justice Department lawyers as something more than mere combatants. For good reason, judges assumed that federal lawyers told them the truth about the facts and the law of their cases. In legal terms, the actions of the Justice Department received a “presumption of regularity,” which the private bar did not enjoy. But based on the frequently appalling conduct — for instance, lying, gaslighting, hiding facts and evidence — of Justice Department lawyers in the Bondi era, many judges are no longer giving government lawyers the benefit of the doubt. Nor should they.

Replacing Ms. Bondi with her deputy, Todd Blanche, or the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lee Zeldin, to name two likely successors, will not solve this problem unless the new attorney general makes the commitment, unlikely under the circumstances, that the Justice Department will return to its tradition of honesty and integrity."

Exclusive: Trump's DOJ says he's not required to turn over official records; Axios, April 1, 2026

Alex Isenstadt , Axios; Exclusive: Trump's DOJ says he's not required to turn over official records

[Kip Currier: This is an appalling anti-democratic determination by Trump 2.0's DOJ. The post-Watergate Presidential Records Act of 1978 was enacted through bipartisan legislating, signed into law by President Jimmy Carter, to curb government corruption and promote transparency, in the wake of actions by Pres. Richard M. Nixon and his administration. The Act codifies that presidential records are the property of the federal government, not the President and the Executive Branch, and are public records.

Democratically-elected officials must be accountable to their citizenries. The Presidential Records Act represents a vital means, among others, for holding Presidents and their administrations accountable for their actions by ensuring preservation of and access to their records by present and future generations.]

"President Trump's Justice Department has concluded that a federal law requiring presidential records to be turned over to the government is unconstitutional, a senior White House official tells Axios.

Why it matters: The finding is an indication Trump will be reluctant to give all of his official records to the National Archives at the end of his term, as presidents have done for nearly a half-century under the Presidential Records Act of 1978.

The law, passed in the post-Watergate era as a hedge against government corruption, states that every official record regarding a president's decisions or policies belongs to the U.S. government, not the president."

Pam Bondi had a ploy. A million people had opinions about it. | Opinion; USA TODAY, March 31, 2026

Chris Brennan, USA TODAY; Pam Bondi had a ploy. A million people had opinions about it. | Opinion

Study up on the attorney general's proposed rule and then head over to the Federal Register and let her hear what you think about it while you still have time.

 "U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi devised a scheme earlier this month to run cover for Department of Justice lawyers who face ethics investigations for how they do their jobs.

Bondi wants to hijack the processes that state bar associations use to conduct those investigations, with a proposed rule to allow the DOJ to step in to stall those probes for as long as she likes.

But first, Americans get a month to tell the attorney general what they think of her scheme. And Americans have plenty to say. More than 1 million people have posted comments on the Federal Register since Bondi's proposed DOJ rule change was posted March 5. And the 30-day comment period still has a week to go until the April 6 deadline."

The Trump Administration Floats a New Way to Humiliate the Legal Profession; The New York Times, March 13, 2026

Deborah Pearlstein , The New York Times; The Trump Administration Floats a New Way to Humiliate the Legal Profession

"To fill those empty seats, the department has begun an increasingly desperate effort to recruit hires. (“Don’t be scared off by the transcript requirement,” a conservative law school reportedly told its students. “G.P.A. is not a strong factor.”) Even so, it seems too few lawyers are willing to take the chance. So the Trump administration last week offered up a different solution: a proposed rule that aims to shield Department of Justice lawyers from independent ethics investigations.

Such an arrangement would run afoul of a federal law known as the McDade Amendment, which says that government lawyers are subject to the ethics rules of the states in which they practice, “to the same extent and in the same manner” as every other lawyer licensed in the state. The proposed rule would be challenged in court immediately if it ever took effect. It shouldn’t get that far, however. It would do much more than potentially give department lawyers a free pass to lie on the president’s behalf. It would severely limit the courts’ ability to offer any kind of independent check on the executive branch.

Rules requiring lawyers to serve as honest officers of the court have been adopted by every state and the District of Columbia. They serve a host of purposes, starting with the basic right to fairness. These rules are also critical to the independence of the courts, which depend on access to reliable evidence and accurate representations by counsel.

Such rules serve an especially critical function in constitutional democracies, which distinguish themselves from authoritarian regimes in part by insisting that truth and falsehood exist separately from whatever the government may assert...

The move against state bars is of a piece with the administration’s broader strategy against universities, the media and law firms — any set of organizations capable of challenging the president’s power. And few things threaten it more than holding it to the truth."

D.C. Bar Begins Disciplinary Proceedings Against Ed Martin; The New York Times, March 10, 2026

Devlin Barrett, The New York Times ; D.C. Bar Begins Disciplinary Proceedings Against Ed Martin

A new legal filing accused Mr. Martin, a senior Justice Department official, of an unethical pressure campaign against Georgetown University.

"The disciplinary body for lawyers in the District of Columbia has filed ethics charges against Ed Martin, a senior Justice Department official in the Trump administration, accusing him of misconduct in seeking to punish Georgetown University’s law school, according to a filing.

Mr. Martin, who has spearheaded efforts by President Trump to use the Justice Department to punish the president’s perceived enemies, faces two counts of misconduct. The filing, submitted on Friday before the D.C. Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility, is comparable to a civil lawsuit complaint in court and was signed by Hamilton P. Fox III, the disciplinary counsel for the D.C. bar.

Mr. Martin, who was forced to step down as the U.S. attorney in Washington because he did not have the Senate votes for confirmation, instead became the Justice Department’s pardon attorney. In that role, he has had far more access and influence in the White House than many of his predecessors.

The complaint is a significant escalation in the efforts to use state and local bars to punish lawyers in the Trump administration for purported violations of ethics rules in pursuit of the president’s aims. Last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi proposed a new rule to try to stall or delay bar associations from conducting such investigations into lawyers at the department."

Trump Justice Dept. Seeks to Stall State Bar Discipline of Its Lawyers; The New York Times, March 4, 2026

Devlin Barrett and Jonah E. Bromwich, The New York Times ; Trump Justice Dept. Seeks to Stall State Bar Discipline of Its Lawyers

The administration has no control over the disciplinary authorities of state bar associations, but a new proposal would let the attorney general ask them to suspend proceedings involving department lawyers.

"The Justice Department is seeking to intervene in state bar associations’ disciplinary proceedings against its lawyers, reflecting a growing fear among administration officials that attorneys who do their bidding could be punished by legal ethics organizations and lose their ability to practice law.

The department, in a notice posted online in the Federal Register, said it wanted priority in investigating any allegations of wrongdoing by its own lawyers in an effort to rein in the power of state bar authorities to investigate or discipline its lawyers.

But the department has no control over state bar disciplinary authorities, and the proposal envisions merely requesting that a state bar association “suspend any parallel investigations until the completion of the department’s review.”...

Melanie Lawrence, who served as the interim chief trial counsel for the California State Bar from 2018 to 2021, said that state bars played a critical role in the legal profession by enforcing ethics rules, even for senior Justice Department officials.

“None of these Department of Justice attorneys, from Pam Bondi to the lowliest line attorney, would have a job were it not for the license they have in a particular state,” Ms. Lawrence said. “The state bar holds the key to these people’s ability to wield their sword.”"

Trump Administration, in Apparent Reversal, Tries to Continue Fight Against Law Firms; The New York Times, March 3, 2026

 Michael S. Schmidt,Jonah E. Bromwich and Devlin Barrett, The New York Times; Trump Administration, in Apparent Reversal, Tries to Continue Fight Against Law Firms

The administration told a court on Monday that it was abandoning its defense of executive orders targeting the firms. But on Tuesday, the Justice Department appeared to abruptly change its position.

"The Trump administration indicated on Tuesday that it planned to renew its defense of executive orders that it had leveled against law firms, a sharp reversal a day after indicating that it would drop that fight in court, according to people familiar with the matter.

The situation remained fluid Tuesday morning. It was not immediately clear what legal strategy the administration would ultimately embrace or whether a court would allow the Justice Department to reverse course.

The Justice Department did not immediately comment. The White House declined to comment...

It was not immediately clear on Tuesday what had prompted the about-face. But one question that the administration’s decision a day earlier to abandon its cases raised was whether the deals it made with nine law firms would survive and whether those contracts — which were not made public — were considered unconstitutional given that the district court ruling would be final."

Trump Administration Abandons Efforts to Impose Orders on Law Firms; The New York Times, March 2, 2026

Jonah E. Bromwich and Michael S. Schmidt, The New York Times; Trump Administration Abandons Efforts to Impose Orders on Law Firms

The move amounts to a surrender in a clash that has led many law firms to submit to the president rather than face the threat of his executive orders

"The Trump administration on Monday abandoned its attempts to impose potentially crippling executive orders against law firms that refused to capitulate to the president, walking away from its appeal of victories the firms had won against the White House.

With a brief due this week, Justice Department lawyers told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that they were no longer interested in pursuing the cases and were voluntarily asking the court to dismiss them.

The decision is the White House’s most significant acknowledgment that the executive orders cannot be successfully defended in court. The move is particularly striking given that some firms opted to reach deals in a bid to head off executive orders that President Trump’s Justice Department said it would no longer stand behind.

The battle over the executive orders had roiled the legal establishment and led many firms to submit to Mr. Trump rather than face the existential threat his directives represented. The orders barred the firms from government business and suggested that their clients could lose government contracts, spurring widespread panic in the legal profession."

DoJ cases against protesters keep collapsing as officers’ lies are exposed in court; The Guardian, February 21, 2026

Sam Levin, The Guardian; DoJ cases against protesters keep collapsing as officers’ lies are exposed in court

"Department of Justice prosecutors across the US have suffered a string of embarrassing defeats in their aggressive pursuit of criminal cases against people accused of “assaulting” and “impeding” federal officers.

In recent months, the federal government has relentlessly prosecuted protesters, government critics, immigrants and others arrested during immigration operations, often accusing them of physically attacking officers or interfering with their duties.

But many of those cases have recently been dismissed or ended in not guilty verdicts.

In several high-profile cases, the prosecutions fell apart because they relied on statements by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officers that had no supporting evidence or in some instances were proven by video footage to be blatantly false. Criminal defense lawyers said it was unusual for federal prosecutors to pursue a high volume of charges over minor clashes with law enforcement, and that it was extraordinary to see the DoJ lose case after case across jurisdictions.

Still, the costs for defendants, even if ultimately exonerated, have been enormous, with many having their mugshots blasted by the government and some forced to languish in jail or have criminal charges hang over them for weeks and months."

Failure to Alert Judge to Press Law for Reporter Search Draws Ethical Scrutiny; The New York Times, February 5, 2026

Charlie Savage , The New York Times; Failure to Alert Judge to Press Law for Reporter Search Draws Ethical Scrutiny

"The disclosure that the Justice Department failed to alert a judge about a 1980 law protecting journalists when applying for a warrant to search a Washington Post reporter’s home last month is casting new scrutiny on the legal issues raised by the raid.

Specialists in legal ethics said that if the prosecutor who submitted the application, Gordon D. Kromberg, an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, knew about the 1980 law, the failure to bring it up violated a longstanding legal ethics rule.

The Justice Department and Mr. Kromberg did not respond to requests for comment. Nor did lawyers for The Post and its reporter.

Here is a closer look."

The Trump Administration Is Lying About Gun Rights and the Death of Alex Pretti; Reason, January 25, 2026

ROBBY SOAVE, Reason; The Trump Administration Is Lying About Gun Rights and the Death of Alex Pretti

"As with the killing of Renee Good two weeks ago, the legal threshold at which lethal force can be justified is whether the officer who killed Pretti reasonably feared for his own safety. Only a careful, impartial investigation can determine that. The Justice Department has declined to conduct such an investigation into Good's death, instead seeking to investigate the victim's family.

Video footage of Pretti's death shows federal agents using pepper spray on protesters. Pretti appears to be recording the altercation with his cell phone. After an agent shoves one of the protesters to the ground, Pretti moves to assist her. Several CBP agents then decide to bring Pretti down.

It's conceivable that the agent who shot Pretti had the impression that he was reaching for his weapon—though the first shot clearly went off after another agent disarmed the protester. It's also possible that the killer didn't have even that much justification. Yet federal authorities have all but ruled out that possibility, and are making abjectly false statements in support of their mendacious posture.

Noem has repeatedly claimed it as a fact that Pretti intended to harm officers. "This individual showed up to a law enforcement operation with a weapon and dozens of rounds of ammunition," she told reporters. "He wasn't there to peacefully protest. He was there to perpetuate violence." Miller flatly asserted that Pretti was a "domestic terrorist" who "tried to assassinate federal law enforcement."

These are lies. They have no evidence that Pretti wanted to kill anyone. Even if evidence were unexpectedly to come out tomorrow that he was secretly a would-be assassin, it would still be wrong for officials to state as fact that Pretti intended to kill. There are no known facts that establish murder as his motivation. This is a man who was watching officers interact with protesters and recording it on his phone. Contrary to what the Department of Homeland Security wrote on X, he did not approach law enforcement, let alone with a gun drawn."

AG Bondi demands access to Minnesota voter rolls after fatal Border Patrol shooting; Democracy Docket, January 24, 2026

Jacob Knutson, Democracy Docket; AG Bondi demands access to Minnesota voter rolls after fatal Border Patrol shooting

[Kip Currier: As noted by MS NOW commentators last night, Pam Bondi's letter to Minn. Gov. Tim Walz looks like another example of Trumpian transactionalism: meet our demands for Minnesota voter rolls, end "sanctuary policies", and be willing to collaborate with ICE efforts, and we may then ease up on immigration raids in your state. 

That looks and sounds like a form of state-sanctioned extortion.]

[Excerpt]

"Just hours after federal immigration officers shot and killed a man in Minneapolis, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi seized upon the incident to demand access to Minnesota’s voter rolls, directly tying the Trump administration’s quest for voters’ unredacted personal data to its aggressive immigration raids across the state.

In a letter to Gov. Tim Walz (D) Saturday, Bondi blamed state and local leaders for the unrest ignited by the Trump administration’s expansive immigration enforcement operations. She claimed that Walz could “restore the rule of law” by complying with a list of demands, including giving the Department of Justice (DOJ) the state’s voter registration records.

“Allow the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice to access voter rolls to confirm that Minnesota’s voter registration practices comply with federal law as authorized by the Civil Rights Act of 1960,” Bondi said in the letter, which was first obtained by Fox News.

The letter adds the state’s unwillingness to share voting data to a litany of grievances the Trump administration has leveled against Minnesota, which range from the local Democratic leaders’ rejection of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) actions to a longstanding welfare fraud scandal.

Bondi’s other demands included sharing Minnesota’s data on Medicaid and supplementary food assistance with the federal government, ending “sanctuary policies” and supporting and collaborating with ICE. This would allow the government to investigate fraud and curb “crime and violence” in the state, the attorney general claimed.

In sum, Bondi’s letter represents a major assault on Minnesota’s sovereignty, demanding that it forfeit its ability to make and enforce its own laws and maintain its voter rolls without oversight from the executive branch, which does not have authority over elections."

Some Episcopal clergy invoke faith to counter ‘fascism’ after ICE killing of citizen in Minnesota; Episcopal News Service, January 13, 2026

David Paulsen, Episcopal News Service; Some Episcopal clergy invoke faith to counter ‘fascism’ after ICE killing of citizen in Minnesota

"When a U.S. citizen, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good, was killed last week by federal immigration officials in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the congregation at Grace Episcopal Church responded by finding solace in their faith. They gathered for worship and prayer. The Rev. Susan Daughtry, Grace’s rector, invited members that evening, Jan. 7, for an impromptu Compline on Zoom, and they grieved together.

Grace Episcopal Church is located about three miles from where an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official shot and killed Good in her car. Their brief altercation and its deadly conclusion were captured on video, generating intense reactions on all sides, from the White House to American communities far from the violent scene on a residential Minneapolis street.

Since then, Episcopalians and Episcopal clergy across the United States have joined anti-ICE protests and attended prayer vigils for Good. Some read her name in their Sunday services during the Prayers of the People. Many are looking to Jesus’ life and teachings for guidance on how best to respond, as Christians, to what some fear is an increasingly authoritarian and unchecked federal government.

“It’s been a painful week in Minnesota, and this is a critical moment in the history of our nation,” Minnesota Bishop Craig Loya said in a Facebook post inviting Episcopalians to join an online prayer vigil at 7 p.m. Central Jan. 13 on Zoom. Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe also will participate.

The Episcopal Church also is promoting its Protesting Faithfully tool kit, offering “spiritual grounding and practical resources for faithful presence at protests and public demonstrations.”"

3 Prosecutors Quit After Push to Investigate ICE Shooting Victim’s Widow; The New York Times, January 13, 2026

Ernesto Londoño , The New York Times; 3 Prosecutors Quit After Push to Investigate ICE Shooting Victim’s Widow

"Three Minnesota federal prosecutors resigned over the Justice Department’s push to investigate the widow of a woman killed by an ICE agent and its reluctance to investigate the shooter, according to people with knowledge of their decision.

Joseph H. Thompson, who was second in command at the U.S. attorney’s office and oversaw a sprawling fraud investigation that has roiled Minnesota’s political landscape, was among those who quit Tuesday, according to three people with knowledge of the decision.

Mr. Thompson’s resignation came after senior Justice Department officials pressed for a criminal investigation into the actions of the widow of Renee Nicole Good, the Minneapolis woman killed by an ICE agent last Wednesday.

Mr. Thompson, 47, a career prosecutor, objected to that approach as well as to the Justice Department’s refusal to include state officials in investigating whether the shooting itself was lawful, the people familiar with his decision said."

A top DoJ official trained Pam Bondi on ethics rules in the department. Then he was fired; The Guardian, January 3, 2026

Sam Levine, The Guardian; A top DoJ official trained Pam Bondi on ethics rules in the department. Then he was fired

"Joseph Tirrell was reaching the end of a vacation on 11 July, and watching TV at home. He checked his email on his phone and saw a message from his employer, the Department of Justice. He thought it was strange that he was receiving email from the government on his personal account. Inside was a message that he was being fired from his job as the top ethics official at the department.

The notice, signed by Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, did not give a reason for his firing. It also misspelled his first name, addressing it to “Jospeh W Tirrell”. Tirrell called his bosses at the department, who at first seemed as surprised as he did, before eventually confirming that he had in fact been terminated.

At the start of the year, Tirrell knew that he might attract scrutiny from the incoming administration because he had signed off on special counsel Jack Smith receiving pro-bono legal services from a private law firm as he prepared to leave the government, something Tirrell said was clearly allowed under the department’s ethics rules. As the department’s top ethics official, he was responsible for overseeing ethics compliance across the agency and training the department’s top officers in their obligations. But as months passed and Tirrell remained in his job, he thought he was safe.

Tirrell is one of scores of career federal employees this year who have been dismissed without reason. He is now suing the department over his firing."

So This Is Why Trump Didn’t Want to Release the Epstein Files; The Atlantic, December 24, 2025

Sarah Fitzpatrick , The Atlantic; So This Is Why Trump Didn’t Want to Release the Epstein Files

"Trump has also insisted that he knew nothing of Epstein’s criminal activity—though his critics have questioned how that could be true given their close relationship and history of chasing women together. Members of Congress from both parties have said they will continue to probe the issue in the upcoming year. Representatives I spoke with told me their takeaway from reading the files is that top officials in the Trump administration have not been honest about what was in them, and that they intend to press Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel for more information.

“Although the files are overly redacted, they’ve already demonstrated that the narrative painted by Patel in hearings, Bondi in press statements, and Trump himself on social media wasn’t accurate,” Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who co-authored the Epstein legislation, told me. “A complete disclosure consistent with the law will show there are more men implicated in the files in possession of the government.”"

Trump Is Getting Weaker, and the Resistance Is Getting Stronger; The New York Times, December 26, 2025

MICHELLE GOLDBERG, The New York Times; Trump Is Getting Weaker, and the Resistance Is Getting Stronger

"It has been a gruesome year for those who see Donald Trump’s kakistocracy clearly. He returned to office newly emboldened, surrounded by obsequious tech barons, seemingly in command of not just the country but also the zeitgeist. Since then, it’s been a parade of nightmares — armed men in balaclavas on the streets, migrants sent to a torture prison in El Salvador, corruption on a scale undreamed of by even the gaudiest third-world dictators and the shocking capitulation by many leaders in business, law, media and academia. Trying to wrap one’s mind around the scale of civic destruction wrought in just 11 months stretches the limits of the imagination, like conceptualizing light-years or black holes.

And yet, as 2025 limps toward its end, there are reasons to be hopeful...

While Trump “has been able to do extraordinary damage that will have generational effects, he has not successfully consolidated power,” said Leah Greenberg, a founder of the resistance group Indivisible. “That has been staved off, and it has been staved off not, frankly, due to the efforts of pretty much anyone in elite institutions or political leadership but due to the efforts of regular people declining to go along with fascism.”"

Jeffrey Epstein letter to Larry Nassar appears to reference President Trump; USA TODAY, December 23, 2025

Mark GiannottoBart Jansen, USA TODAY ; Jeffrey Epstein letter to Larry Nassar appears to reference President Trump

"A letter from Jeffrey Epstein to disgraced former USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar is among the more than 29,000 documents released by the Justice Department on Tuesday, Dec. 23.

Nassar was sentenced in 2018 to 40 to 175 years in prison after pleading guilty to seven counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for assaulting the young athletes he treated while working for both USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University.

The handwritten letter from Epstein to Nassar was postmarked three days after Epstein's death in prison by reported suicide in August 2019, and appears to reference United States President Donald Trump."