Any government lawyer who ’refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Trump administration’ could be terminated, Pam Bondi wrote.
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers who refuse orders could be fired, the new head of the department has said on her first day on the job.
“The responsibilities of Department of Justice attorneys include not only aggressively enforcing criminal and civil laws enacted by Congress, but also vigorously defending presidential policies and actions against legal challenges on behalf of the United States. The discretion afforded Department attorneys entrusted with those responsibilities does not include latitude to substitute personal political views or judgments for those that prevailed in the election,” U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote in a memorandum dated Feb. 5.
“When Department of Justice attorneys, for example, refuse to advance good-faith arguments by declining to appear in court or sign briefs, it undermines the constitutional order and deprives the President of the benefit of his lawyers.
“It is therefore the policy of the Department of Justice that any attorney who because of their personal political views or judgments declines to sign a brief or appear in court, refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Administration, or otherwise delays or impedes the Department’s mission will be subject to discipline and potentially termination, consistent with applicable law.”
Bondi issued a number of memos on Wednesday within hours of being sworn in, including an order to investigate prosecutors involved in the cases against President Donald Trump and a directive to pause funding to “sanctuary cities.”
The one-page memo detailing how DOJ attorneys must advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Trump administration follows instances where DOJ attorneys at times declined to advance Trump’s agenda in his first term.
Sally Yates, who was acting attorney general at the time, in 2017 told DOJ attorneys not to defend Trump’s ban on foreigners from some Muslim-majority countries, writing in a missive that she was not convinced that defending Trump’s order was “consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right.”
