In a striking move, Attorney General Pam Bondi has reportedly dismissed multiple Department of Justice employees connected to past investigations into President Donald Trump, sparking debates over the independence of the agency.
According to The Hill, the dismissals, occurring during Trump’s second term, target staff tied to former special counsel Jack Smith’s probes into Trump’s handling of classified materials and actions related to the 2020 election.
The firings began late last week, with initial reports surfacing on Friday from Reuters about Bondi’s decision to remove several DOJ personnel. According to The New York Times, at least nine workers were let go on that day alone. Other sources, including Axios and The Washington Post, indicated a larger number, with as many as 20 employees, including U.S. marshals, support staff, and attorneys, being terminated.
On Saturday, multiple outlets reported that two prosecutors who had worked directly under Jack Smith were among those dismissed. These reports relied on anonymous sources familiar with the situation. The Hill has contacted the DOJ for an official statement regarding the terminations.
The context of these firings traces back to Jack Smith’s tenure as special counsel, during which he led investigations into Trump’s retention of sensitive records at his Mar-a-Lago estate and alleged interference in the 2020 election results. Smith ultimately dropped both cases late last year, referencing a long-standing DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president. He later resigned from his position after former President Joe Biden’s administration.
Shortly after Trump began his second term in late January, the DOJ took further action by dismissing at least a dozen prosecutors who had been involved in criminal cases against him. The department stated that these individuals were deemed untrustworthy for their roles. This wave of terminations appears to align with a larger initiative to reshape the agency’s personnel.
Reports on Saturday revealed that the fired employees were pinpointed by the DOJ’s newly formed “Weaponization Working Group.” This group was established to scrutinize the department’s activities over the past four years, with a particular focus on Smith’s investigative efforts. The group’s findings have played a key role in determining which staff members were let go.
On Monday, Patty Hartman, a prominent public affairs specialist within the District of Columbia U.S. Attorney’s Office media team, was also terminated. Hartman’s dismissal added to the growing list of personnel changes under Bondi’s leadership. Her firing has drawn additional attention due to her visible role in the department’s communications.
Commenting on the situation, Hartman expressed concern over the evolving dynamics between the White House and the DOJ. “The rules don’t exist anymore. There used to be a line, used to be a very distinct separation between the White House and the Department of Justice, because one should not interfere with the work of the other,” she told CBS News. “That line is very definitely gone,” Hartman added, highlighting her unease with the recent developments.
The firings under Bondi’s direction are seen as part of a concerted effort to eliminate staff associated with Smith’s prior investigations into Trump. These probes, which once posed significant legal challenges to the former president, have now become a focal point for restructuring within the department. The scale of the dismissals suggests a deliberate strategy to alter the DOJ’s composition during Trump’s current term.
The termination of at least 20 employees, as reported by some outlets, has raised questions about the broader impact on the department’s workforce. Roles ranging from marshals to legal counsel have been affected, indicating a wide-reaching purge. The loss of experienced staff could influence ongoing and future operations at the DOJ.
As news of the firings spreads, public and political reactions are beginning to surface, though specific responses remain limited in early reports. The involvement of high-profile cases tied to Trump adds a layer of complexity to the unfolding situation. Observers are keenly watching how these changes might shape perceptions of the DOJ’s impartiality.
With the DOJ yet to provide an official comment, uncertainty lingers over the full scope and reasoning behind Bondi’s decisions. The creation of the Weaponization Working Group signals that further reviews and potential dismissals could follow. For now, the department’s silence leaves many questions unanswered about its future trajectory.
The recent terminations mark a significant shift within the DOJ, particularly as they occur early in Trump’s second presidency. Critics may view these moves as an attempt to influence the agency’s independence, while supporters might argue they are necessary to address perceived biases. The long-term implications of these changes remain to be seen as Bondi continues her tenure.