Photo credit: www.cbsnews.com
Washington — A coalition of eight former government watchdogs who were dismissed by President Trump has initiated a lawsuit contesting their terminations.
The legal action, presented in federal district court in Washington, D.C., claims that their dismissals violate established federal protections designed to shield inspectors general from political interference in their oversight functions. A pivotal law enacted in 2022, which received bipartisan support, mandates that the president must notify Congress 30 days prior to dismissing an inspector general and provide a comprehensive justification, including specific, detailed reasons for the dismissal.
The ranks of the former inspectors general filing the suit included officials from the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, State, Education, Agriculture, and Labor, along with the Small Business Administration. The lawsuit lists the president and the leaders of the mentioned departments as defendants.
Inspectors general are expected to remain apolitical while carrying out audits and investigations to safeguard their agencies against misconduct, waste, and fraud. Their selection typically transcends political lines, requiring Senate confirmation.
“The action taken by President Trump to terminate a vital and long-standing source of impartial oversight of his administration undermines the rule of law,” the plaintiffs asserted in their comprehensive 32-page complaint, characterizing the dismissals as “both unlawful and unreasonable.”
According to the lawsuit, the agencies revoked the former inspectors’ access to their official email accounts and computer systems, seized government-issued devices like phones and laptops, and confiscated access badges. The plaintiffs reported that they were effectively barred from entering government facilities. Arrangements were reportedly made by agency staff for them to retrieve personal items from their offices, as documented in the lawsuit.
“These measures have achieved their intended purpose of incapacitating the IGs from fulfilling their legal responsibilities,” the complaint highlighted. “Given that the supposed dismissals were illegal, they are void, rendering the aforementioned actions as unlawful interference with the IGs’ official duties.”
The former watchdogs are seeking a court ruling declaring their removals invalid, which would enable them to retain their roles as inspectors general until the president can legally dismiss them, as per federal law.
President Trump terminated the internal watchdogs on January 24, merely four days into his second term. They received notification through a brief two-line email from the Office of Presidential Personnel, stating, “Due to changing priorities, your position as inspector general … is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service.”
In a response to reporters last month, Trump characterized the dismissals as “standard” practices and “very common.” However, the former inspectors general countered in their lawsuit that this perspective is inaccurate, noting that presidents from both major parties, including Trump during his first term, had traditionally refrained from removing oversight officials appointed by their predecessors.
Additionally, they emphasized that Trump failed to formally notify Congress of his intentions to terminate the inspectors general or to provide the requisite “substantive rationale” mandated by law.
“Inspectors General are meant to serve as watchdogs, not lapdogs,” the lawsuit contends. “The adverse effects of the administration’s contrary approach are significant and cannot be understated.”
The decision to dismiss these officials raised concerns among congressional leaders. Following the terminations, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, and Ranking Member Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Illinois, wrote to the president requesting the necessary 30-day notice and justification for the dismissals.
Grassley played a key role in sponsoring the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022, which outlines the procedural standards for dismissing an inspector general.
In their correspondence, Grassley and Durbin noted: “While inspectors general are not immune from removal due to appropriate reasons, legal procedures must be adhered to.” They further stressed, “This matter concerns public and congressional accountability, vital for maintaining public trust in the Inspector General community—an objective shared across a broader spectrum in Congress. Inspectors general play a critical role in identifying fraud, waste, and misconduct within the Executive Branch, which you have publicly indicated is also your goal.”
The lawsuit against Trump’s dismissals of the inspectors general is part of a broader legal landscape, with over forty lawsuits being filed across the nation against the administration. Among these, several disputes focus on the president’s dismissal of various government figures, including the heads of the National Labor Relations Board and Office of Special Counsel, which addresses whistleblower retaliation and Hatch Act violations, as well as a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board.
More from CBS News
Source
www.cbsnews.com