Skip to content

ProPublica: Federal judges chastise Trump's Justice Department

newsJul 28, 202639917

ProPublica reviewed hundreds of cases since President Trump returned to the White House and found federal judges across the country publicly chastising Justice Department lawyers as “unlawful,” “unethical” and “unseemly.” Judges nominated by presidents from both parties singled out breaches of the presumption of regularity, the long-standing practice of taking government officials’ representations at face value; ProPublica found more than 40 opinions that explicitly referenced that presumption. The article says the shift coincides with an exodus of veteran DOJ lawyers and a reorientation of priorities in Trump’s second term. In a May Rhode Island case, Trump-appointed Judge Mary McElroy quashed DOJ subpoena requests in an investigation of a hospital’s care of transgender children after finding prosecutors withheld information, misrepresented facts and falsely claimed the investigation was based in Texas. Former Judge John E. Jones told ProPublica that judges “simply don’t believe the representations” made by U.S. attorneys and that the level of criticism is unprecedented. Scholars and the reporting say judges are using unusually forceful language in orders, signaling that the judicial branch is losing trust in the Justice Department. The immediate effect has been more skeptical, scrutinizing rulings that limit courts’ willingness to accept DOJ assertions without corroboration.

1 source