Department of Injustice
April 2026
In the November 2024 issue of The Ethics Report, we raised a central question: Will a retribution-focused agenda by President Donald Trump undermine the policies supported by voters? Now, 15 months into his second term, that question appears increasingly relevant.
The recent removal of Attorney General Pam Bondi has renewed attention on this issue. Explanations for her dismissal vary widely. Some commentators, including voices on Fox News, have suggested that the decision reflects President Trump’s management style—using leadership changes to elevate performance. Others, including reporting from CNN, point to the president’s frustration with Bondi’s handling of high-profile investigations, as well as a perceived lack of aggressiveness in pursuing certain political opponents.
A third perspective, reported by Politico, quotes Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche as saying that only the president knows the true reason for the decision. Blanche added his view that the previous administration had “weaponized” the Department of Justice in unprecedented ways—a claim that reflects a broader and ongoing political debate. Blanche is essentially saying—without saying—the previous administration used lawfare, and turnabout is fair play.
Despite these differing interpretations, the actions of the Department of Justice over the past 15 months have drawn significant attention. According to reporting by NBC News, a growing number of individuals—many of them political figures—have been investigated or targeted by the DOJ during this period.
Those reportedly investigated or scrutinized include:
• Former FBI Director James Comey
• New York Attorney General Letitia James
• Former CIA Director John Brennan
• Senator Adam Schiff
• Several Democratic members of Congress, including Elissa Slotkin, Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan
• Minnesota officials, including Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey
• Federal Reserve leaders Jerome Powell and Lisa Cook
• Former National Security Advisor John Bolton
Historically, the role of Attorney General has varied widely in visibility and controversy. Conservative news sources say that the turnover for Attorneys General is not a new pattern. Some have served with little public attention, while others have faced intense scrutiny. For example, Richard Kleindienst resigned during the Watergate era amid controversy, and Alberto Gonzales stepped down in 2007 following bipartisan criticism related to the dismissal of U.S. attorneys and questions about political influence.
The broader concern today is not tied to any single personnel decision, but to a developing pattern: whether the Department of Justice is being used in ways that are politically motivated. At the same time, it is important to recognize that the administration has remained highly active across a wide range of policy areas—including trade, immigration enforcement, and foreign policy—earning strong support from some and sharp criticism from others. In that sense, the actions of the Department of Justice have not slowed the administration’s broader agenda.
Even so, the growing list of investigations involving political figures creates the appearance of escalating retribution. President Trump has long embraced a political style that emphasizes strong counterpunches to perceived attacks. When that approach intersects with the authority of the Department of Justice, it raises important questions about the appropriate boundaries between politics and law enforcement. The inclusion of figures such as Jerome Powell and Lisa Cook—who are not traditional political opponents—only heightens those concerns.
Looking ahead, much will depend on the direction set by Pam Bondi’s successor. Will there be a continuation of investigations involving political figures, or a shift toward a more restrained approach? The 2026 midterm elections may also play a significant role, particularly if the actions of the Department of Justice become part of the broader political narrative.
With more than two years remaining in President Trump’s term, many developments are yet to unfold. It seems likely that we will revisit the central question once again: Will a retribution-focused agenda ultimately overshadow the broader policy goals supported by voters?
Lee Rasch
