Photo credit: thehill.com

Justice Department’s Tactics Under Scrutiny Amid Upcoming Testimony

In a controversial move, the Department of Justice (DOJ) prepared to dispatch U.S. marshals to the residence of a former employee, Liz Oyer, in connection with her planned appearance at a forum addressing the restoration of actor Mel Gibson’s gun rights. This event, which will feature high-profile Democrats, is set to discuss the influence of the Trump administration on the DOJ.

Internal communications reveal that the DOJ intended to deliver a letter to Oyer, urging her not to speak at the event. This communication was aimed at dissuading her from discussing her allegations of being terminated due to her resistance to recommendations for Gibson’s gun rights restoration.

The law enforcement visit was scheduled between 9 p.m. and 10 p.m. on Friday. However, Oyer confirmed receipt of the letter via electronic means, leading to the cancellation of the in-person delivery. Oyer’s attorney criticized the DOJ’s actions as an alarming intimidation tactic. “The unprecedented step of involving armed officers to simply deliver a letter is not only inappropriate but raises serious ethical concerns,” stated attorney Michael Bromwich.

Bromwich further argued that the DOJ’s actions were retaliatory, as Oyer has been engaged in what he describes as “statutorily protected whistleblower conduct.” He emphasized the misuse of DOJ resources for intimidation purposes and highlighted the importance of legal protections for whistleblowers reporting government misconduct.

Oyer’s dismissal followed her unwillingness to endorse Gibson’s inclusion on a list of individuals whose gun rights could be restored, a decision she attributed to pressures from the Trump administration. She argued that the final call on such matters should rest with DOJ leadership, rather than being politically influenced.

In the Friday letter, Associate Deputy Attorney General Kendra Wharton expressed expectations that Oyer would refrain from discussing the department’s internal processes regarding Gibson’s gun rights. She noted potential implications of executive privilege surrounding internal deliberations and suggested that Oyer’s testimony could breach professional responsibility guidelines.

In response, Bromwich defended Oyer’s right to testify, arguing that the DOJ’s claims of executive privilege were without merit, particularly as the President had not invoked it regarding the matters at hand. He underscored that privilege cannot be used to conceal misconduct, referencing a relevant Office of Legal Counsel opinion.

The DOJ has yet to provide a comment on the situation. Oyer is set to appear at the hearing titled “Restoring Accountability: Exposing Trump’s Attacks on the Rule of Law” on Monday, alongside other former DOJ attorneys, including Rachel Cohen, who resigned in protest over her firm’s response to the Trump administration’s pressures.

Source
thehill.com