Civil Rights Division Under Scrutiny
The civil rights division once stood as the pride of the Department of Justice. Now, due to its unwavering commitment to advancing President Trump’s policies, it has become a source of embarrassment. Perhaps the rigidity of the leadership’s ideology serves as a shield against the discomfort that comes with that realization.
Having practiced law in Washington, DC for over 45 years, I’ve had a front-row seat to these developments. During the Clinton administration, I liaised regularly with the White House lawyers’ office and the Department of Justice. My experience spans working in the Deputy Attorney General’s Office under Obama and serving in the Civil Rights Division from January 2022 to January 2025. I’ve also dealt with the department throughout various significant eras, including Watergate and the presidencies of Reagan, Bush, and Trump.
We can assert that the ongoing attacks on civil rights today are not typical and that this approach to law enforcement is deeply flawed.
While previous Republican administrations have faced criticism for ignoring civil rights, the Trump administration has displayed a uniquely destructive approach characterized by a stark hostility toward these rights. Even if the department were to vigorously oppose racism, it wouldn’t automatically reject such efforts as political interference.
The Department of Justice has historically followed various policy directions from the White House, yet it maintained a level of independence in enforcement decisions. I recall instances when I was “asked” to leave meetings with the Justice Department that turned contentious over enforcement issues. The integrity of departmental independence was always valued. As a political appointee, one of my responsibilities was to shield career staff from political pressures. It seems, to my knowledge, that career employees in the current administration haven’t been pressured to align with the president’s agenda or leave.
On that front, I see no issue with the Civil Rights Division’s stated commitment to addressing anti-Semitism and discrimination against Christians. Such discrimination is indeed concerning and merits attention. However, there’s a troubling pattern of neglect concerning all other forms of bias.
For instance, the newly appointed Attorney General has released a mission statement for each division that lacks reference to foundational documents like the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which has been crucial in combating housing discrimination.
The voting section’s mission statements are similarly narrow. For decades, Black citizens in the South were largely disenfranchised until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 sought to rectify that injustice. As President Johnson affirmed, it guarantees the right to vote and was pivotal in the struggle for civil rights. Yet, the current mission statements barely acknowledge this law, focusing instead on issues like voter fraud and non-citizen voting, which are relatively minor concerns in the broader electoral context. This emphasis seems to echo Trump’s unfounded claims about the 2020 election.
The Civil Rights Division reportedly mirrors the limited focus of its mission by downsizing leadership and legal staff to just three people. This kind of magical thinking cannot effectively combat discrimination. Ignoring voter oppression won’t make it vanish, and redirecting resources towards marginal issues won’t protect the right to vote.
There’s reason to worry that the department’s skewed approach signals an outright hostility toward civil rights. Context matters here; while the Justice Department has pursued the voting section, Trump previously attempted to disenfranchise countless Americans through executive orders and contested electronic voting measures.
Simultaneously, the Department of Homeland Security has stalled efforts to bolster cybersecurity for voting systems, terminated staff involved in election security, and cut funding for organizations aiding in these efforts.
Moreover, the Attorney General is disbanding the task force that countered foreign election interference and dismantling the public integrity section, which tackled voter fraud and intimidation. These undermining efforts are interlaced with Trump’s relentless denial of the 2020 election results, eroding both the functionality and integrity of our electoral system.
In 1975, Attorney General Edward Levy sought to restore the Justice Department’s integrity post-Watergate, and both Republican and Democratic administrations have generally strived to uphold a standard of law enforcement that avoids bias and ensures fairness.
What we’re witnessing in the Department of Justice, particularly in the Civil Rights Division, is anything but normal. The standard should be to uphold law enforcement integrity, protect civil rights, and respect the Constitution—not merely to carry out the president’s political agenda.
