The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has undergone dramatic shifts. This is particularly the case with regard to its civil rights division, which has been remade by the appointments of former President Donald Trump. In December 2022, Harmeet Dhillon officially took over this division, which many consider to be the “crown jewel” of the DOJ. Since then, she has engaged in unprecedented actions that have set civil rights advocates and legal experts ablaze with outrage and concern.
The civil rights division was created in 1957. It vigorously enforces federal statutes that safeguard the civil rights of all Americans. Under current Division head Dhillon’s leadership, the division is making a radical shift in its priorities. The bill instead now follows Trump’s political agenda, rather than protecting communities of color and low income communities. Staff reports suggest that Dhillon has been sending new mission statements to staff that tell them to focus on the initiatives of the former president.
Chad Mizelle, the department’s chief of staff, publicly attacked one such recent lawsuit—against the department for attempting to evade NEPA compliance—as a “disgrace.” This brief comment summarizes the sentiments of all Connectors. They are rightly concerned that the integrity of civil rights enforcement is being compromised under the current administration.
The recent firing of high-ranking civil servants from the election section has set off a firestorm. Folks are apprehensive about the climate and morale, operational efficacy within the DOJ. Dhillon’s administration has reassigned experienced managers to low-level positions, leading to speculation that this strategy aims to suppress dissent and diminish the division’s effectiveness. Advocates point out that this action is clearly meant to intimidate civil rights enforcement cases.
In what some observers see as a radical step, all top managers from the voting division have been ousted. Attorneys in this section have been given orders to dismiss all pending cases. This includes major lawsuits against voting laws in Georgia and Texas. Atlas on March 31 On March 31, Pamela Bondi made the news that she had dismissed a challenge to Georgia’s voting law. She claimed the Biden administration had “cooked up a story.”
The implications of these actions are profound. Justin Levitt, a former attorney with the DOJ, told Mother Jones in 2021 that this dropping of cases was mainly arbitrary. He stated, “An instruction to drop a case without an explanation of why is just a decision to refuse to enforce the law.”
Our voting section was managed when I started by seven managers each with about 30 managing attorneys. Now, Tamar Hagler, the chief of the voting section, along with five top career managers, has been reassigned to the complaint adjudication office, a move that many see as detrimental to effective civil rights enforcement.
One very accomplished ally of Trump’s, Cleta Mitchell, has been very publicly pressuring the administration to go all the way with civil rights division and abolish it. “Every lawyer in the Voting Section and likely in the Civil Rights Division needs to be terminated,” she declared. “They are not supportive of Pres Trump or MAGA.”
The proposed changes have stirred concerns that they might be part of a larger effort to dismantle established norms within the DOJ. A former voting section attorney remarked, “This is what you do when you don’t really know what the section does and just want to create chaos in the simplest way possible that doesn’t involve you reading anything.” Another former attorney echoed these concerns, stating, “It is extremely clear that the intent is to get absolutely nothing done.”
As these changes are occurring, major questions remain as to what the division’s future mission, priorities, and makeup will be. Observers caution that erasing the distinction between career and political employees could pose a grave danger to law enforcement. Such a shift would further threaten civil rights protections.
The recent announcement on deferred resignation offers to employees adds to that confusion. A hard deadline to make their move by April 28 has many inside the department newly nervous about their future place and purpose.