Free and fair elections and the rule of law are cornerstones of our constitutional system of self-government that must be defended. At the federal level, this means having a strong, independent U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) committed to honoring the Constitution through impartial law enforcement.
As the DOJ states on its website, “The mission of the Department of Justice is to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights.”
Unfortunately, it is all too easy to see alarming signs that the DOJ under the Trump administration is failing to execute this mission as it increasingly comes under the sway of the president’s political agenda.
The evidence of this threat to our democracy has mounted rapidly during the second Trump term and includes:
- Installing leaders with a history of extreme loyalty to Trump and alarming records of failing to defend our democratic ideals.
- Disbanding a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) team that combats foreign threats to our elections.
- Firing or threatening thousands of DOJ personnel involved with investigating and prosecuting the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
- Dropping criminal cases against politicians facing charges ranging from bribery to campaign finance violations.
- Directing the DOJ Civil Rights Division to end its involvement in voting rights cases and pursue a political agenda that could ultimately harm underrepresented communities.
President Trump put an exclamation point on these concerns when he delivered a speech at the Justice Department on March 14 — a highly unusual move, given the tradition of American presidents allowing DOJ to operate independently.
The speech fueled a sense of alarm that this Justice Department will serve as a tool for advancing a political agenda and targeting the president’s political enemies.
Foxes Guarding the Henhouse
Democracy advocates across the country have expressed alarm over Trump’s choice of former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as U.S. attorney general and attorney Harmeet Dhillon to lead the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.
Bondi has faced criticism for her handling of cases in Florida related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Her record on voting rights is also troubling. As the litigation chair for the America First Policy Institute, she oversaw several lawsuits that attempted to curtail the freedom to vote for countless Americans.
Bondi also burnished her credentials as a fierce Trump loyalist while serving as one of his attorneys during his first impeachment trial.
Since becoming attorney general, Bondi has issued a troubling memo that characterizes the DOJ as the president's lawyers (as opposed to lawyers representing the United States and the American people) and explicitly says that the president sets the interests and policy objectives of the department.
For her part, Dhillon was involved in lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results and has promoted disinformation about our electoral process, making multiple false statements about the 2020 election during an interview that took place at the end of 2024.
These actions raise serious questions about her ability to act independently of the White House and on behalf of Americans facing barriers to the freedom to vote.
This combination of extreme loyalty to the president and a history of antidemocratic actions provides ample reason for concern about Bondi and Dhillon’s willingness to lead the DOJ independently.
Refusing to Protect Voting Rights and Elections
In October 2024, Campaign Legal Center, joined by several pro-democracy allies, sued the state of Virginia to stop an illegal purge of registered voters just weeks before the November election.
The purge violated a federal law saying states cannot systematically remove voters from the rolls within 90 days of an election. This voter purge ultimately denied legally registered Americans their freedom to vote.
The Justice Department joined this lawsuit on the side of Virginia voters but reversed course following Trump’s inauguration.
Voters still have a chance to safeguard future elections against similar purge attempts, thanks to CLC’s lawsuit, but the DOJ’s decision to end its involvement sends a chilling signal about what to expect over the next four years.
There’s a similar story playing out in a lawsuit over unfair voting maps in Louisiana, set to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The DOJ has a responsibility to protect Americans’ freedom to vote and is specifically charged with enforcing the nation’s federal voting laws, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Should the DOJ choose not to act or even oppose efforts to protect voting rights, historically disenfranchised communities who have faced barriers to the ballot box must shoulder the responsibility of fighting for these rights in court.
What will the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division choose to focus on if it is not vigorously protecting the freedom to vote? A recent DOJ memo provides a clue. It directs the Civil Rights Division (as well as the Office of Legal Policy) to take actions, including pursuing criminal charges, aimed at eliminating diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) programs in the private sector. This twisted application of civil rights law should be rejected by the courts.
Another memo from the attorney general disbands a special unit with the FBI tasked with confronting foreign threats to our elections. While the 2024 election largely proceeded smoothly, one glaring exception was a series of Election Day bomb threats, which are believed to have originated in Russia.
Addressing foreign interference — including the systematic misuse of social media platforms and intrusions into our country’s election infrastructure — is vitally important. However, the DOJ’s actions, along with moves at other agencies to weaken protections against election interference, send the exact opposite message to voters.
Taking a Pass on Accountability for Politicians
Within the first few weeks of the second Trump term, the DOJ either formally dropped charges or took steps to do so in at least three cases involving violations of campaign finance and financial disclosure laws.
This includes the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who was indicted in September 2024 on charges including bribery, fraud and soliciting illegal foreign campaign contributions.
Also, Tennessee Congressman Andy Ogles (R), who is accused of failing to disclose the true source of hundreds of thousands of dollars funneled to his campaign committee.
And Nebraska Congressman Jeff Fortenberry (R), who is charged with lying to federal investigators and concealing his knowledge of foreign funds illegally donated in 2016 to his congressional campaign.
In all three cases, the politicians involved have found a sympathetic ear from President Trump. A Justice Department making prosecutorial decisions based on whom the president likes or dislikes is doing a disservice to the American people.
Corrupt politicians should be held accountable when they fail to serve the public interest.
Retribution for Investigating and Prosecuting Threats to Our Democracy
DOJ prosecutors and investigators cannot be expected to do their jobs well if they are constantly worried about angering the president and being fired.
Unfortunately, an environment of fear has already been established, with the Trump administration engaging in the systematic targeting of DOJ personnel involved with investigating and prosecuting perpetrators of the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Senior DOJ officials have been fired without cause, including attorneys on former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team who investigated and prosecuted President Trump, as well as the chief of the Public Integrity Section, a DOJ veteran of more than 30 years responsible for overseeing public corruption cases.
The fact that this action concerns the lawful investigation of a nearly successful attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power from one president to the next makes this all the more troubling.
Dishonoring an Honorable Pro-Democracy Legacy
The Trump administration has put sweeping changes in place across the federal government, but the transformation underway at the DOJ is worth special attention given the agency’s history.
Following ratification of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution after the Civil War, formerly enslaved Americans fearlessly stood up for their new rights, including the freedom to vote. These efforts, however, were soon met with widespread violent resistance by white supremacist forces in the South.
Responding to this crisis, Congress created the Department of Justice in 1870 to enforce the nation’s civil rights laws and defend Americans’ freedoms. Some of the new agency’s earliest actions included prosecuting Ku Klux Klan members engaged in voter intimidation and harassment throughout the Deep South.
This same dynamic played itself out over many decades beginning with the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Act, which created the Civil Rights Division, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which gave the DOJ the authority to review and stop discriminatory voting laws from taking effect and sue for violations of federal voting laws.
The DOJ Office of Public Integrity was created in 1976 after the Watergate scandal specifically to focus on abuses of public trust by government officials.
It is not unusual for enforcement priorities to change after a new president selects their leaders at the Justice Department. But what we are seeing today goes beyond the norm and should alarm everyone who believes in the rule of law, free and fair elections and the importance of an independent DOJ.
In the absence of a strong federal advocate for voters, anti-corruption and civil rights, CLC and our allies at the national and state level will defend these fundamental values and freedoms.