Importance Score: 72 / 100 🔴
Trump-Era Justice Department Controversy: Armed Marshals Sent to Deliver Letter to Pardon Attorney
The Justice Department under the Trump administration reportedly planned to dispatch armed U.S. Marshals to deliver a warning letter to a former pardon attorney. This action followed the attorney’s claim that she was terminated for refusing to restore gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, according to a lawyer’s letter obtained by Reuters on Monday. The incident has sparked criticism and raised concerns about potential intimidation tactics.
Unprecedented Tactics Questioned
Michael Bromwich, the legal representative for Liz Oyer, the pardon attorney in question, characterized the Justice Department’s action as “highly unusual” and “completely inappropriate.” In his letter to the department, Bromwich emphasized that sending armed law enforcement officers to the residence of a former, non-accused employee solely to deliver a letter was both unprecedented and unwarranted.
Marshals Rescind Deployment After Email Confirmation
According to Bromwich, the deployment of armed marshals was rescinded on Friday after Oyer confirmed receipt of the letter via email. This averted a potentially confrontational in-person delivery.
Background: Oyer’s Termination and Gibson Case
Oyer, who served as a pardon attorney during the Biden administration, was among several career officials dismissed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on March 7. She has since stated to various news outlets that her dismissal occurred shortly after she declined to endorse the restoration of firearm rights for Mel Gibson, the actor known for films like “Braveheart” and a supporter of former President Donald Trump.
Gibson’s gun rights were revoked following a domestic violence conviction in 2011, which resulted in a probation sentence.
vCard.red is a free platform for creating a mobile-friendly digital business cards. You can easily create a vCard and generate a QR code for it, allowing others to scan and save your contact details instantly.
The platform allows you to display contact information, social media links, services, and products all in one shareable link. Optional features include appointment scheduling, WhatsApp-based storefronts, media galleries, and custom design options.
Congressional Testimony and Allegations of Intimidation
Oyer was among several Justice Department officials who testified on Monday before a hearing convened by Democrats in the House of Representatives and Senate. The hearing focused on the Trump administration’s conduct within the Justice Department and its interactions with law firms involved in cases opposed by the Republican administration.
During her testimony, Oyer recounted the unsettling experience of learning about the marshals’ dispatch while traveling with family, knowing her teenage child was home alone. She expressed relief that the situation was de-escalated due to the understanding of an unnamed individual who facilitated email confirmation of letter receipt.
Democratic Lawmakers Criticize Marshal Deployment
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California denounced the mobilization of marshals as an attempt to “intimidate and silence” Oyer. Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, also a Democrat, likened the tactic to something “ripped straight from the gangster playbook,” highlighting the perceived heavy-handedness of the approach.
Justice Department Declines to Comment
A Justice Department spokesperson has not issued a statement regarding this specific incident.
Confidentiality Concerns and Executive Privilege Claimed in Letter
In the letter sent to Oyer, Associate Deputy Attorney General Kendra Wharton cited “significant confidentiality interests” of the department. The letter, reviewed by Reuters, asserted that these interests were particularly relevant in Oyer’s case due to her role in clemency recommendations to the president. It invoked the doctrine of executive privilege, which aims to protect certain presidential communications from congressional disclosure.
Wharton’s letter cautioned Oyer that should she testify before Congress, the department expected her to adhere to legal obligations, departmental policy, and professional responsibility rules. These encompassed the deliberative processes underlying pardons, clemency decisions, firearm rights restorations, and related matters.
Oyer’s Attorney Dismisses Executive Privilege Claim
Bromwich, in his communication to Blanche, refuted the claim that executive privilege barred Oyer’s testimony, labeling it “baseless.” He argued that Oyer was entitled to whistleblower protections.
Oyer Defiant, Vows to Expose Corruption
Despite the Justice Department’s letter, Oyer testified on Monday, asserting that the letter did not deter her from speaking truthfully. She declared, “I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice,” indicating her resolve to disclose her concerns.