Former DOJ Attorney Liz Oyer Alleges Political Intimidation Following Dismissal
In a notable case that raises concerns about conduct within the Department of Justice (DOJ), Liz Oyer, an attorney who previously served as a pardon attorney, was terminated in March after her refusal to endorse the restoration of gun rights for actor Mel Gibson. Gibson, who had lost his firearm privileges due to domestic violence convictions in 2011, is known to have connections with former President Donald Trump.
Oyer’s dismissal appears to reflect a troubling pattern within the DOJ, culminating in a series of intimidating actions aimed at curbing dissent. On April 4, U.S. marshals were dispatched to Oyer’s residence to deliver a warning letter regarding her forthcoming testimony to Congressional Democrats. Although the marshals were later reassigned once it was confirmed Oyer had received the letter via email, the decision to send armed officers to her home raised significant alarm as an apparent act of intimidation.
During her testimony, Oyer stated, “I felt that it was my obligation to share my concerns about the reckless and unethical use of department resources to accomplish political objectives, including favors for loyalists and friends.” She emphasized that prior to her firing, she had received consistently exemplary performance evaluations from the DOJ.
Following her dismissal, Oyer attempted to obtain her personnel file but reported that the DOJ deemed her request “complex,” subsequently denying her access to critical health insurance information that affected her and her family.
I am here because I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice.
Oyer’s situation raises significant questions about political favoritism within federal agencies, especially in light of recent criticisms surrounding the DOJ’s operations under the Trump administration. Her termination coincided with widespread layoffs affecting over 100,000 federal employees as part of a controversial restructuring. This included the dismissal of key DOJ staff involved in Trump’s prosecution. Oyer’s case sheds light on what some are calling a systematic effort to discourage federal employees from expressing dissent against the administration’s policies.
Moreover, this incident highlights the serious implications of intimidation tactics used against federal employees. As legal expert Stacey Young articulated, the ability to speak freely is crucial for democracy: “If a federal employee cannot speak freely without being threatened by armed agents, it’s not hyperbole to characterize this as a deliberate campaign to traumatize the department’s workforce.”
Oyer’s allegations follow a series of troubling decisions within the DOJ, including an incident where a U.S. citizen was wrongly deported to El Salvador. In her comments regarding why she opposed restoring Gibson’s firearms access, Oyer stated, “Giving guns back to domestic abusers is a serious matter that, in my view, is not something that I could recommend lightly, because there are real consequences that flow from people who have a history of domestic violence being in possession of firearms.”
Recently, Gibson’s gun rights were reinstated by Attorney General Pam Bondi, a development that underscores ongoing concerns about the intersection of political loyalty and judicial processes within the DOJ.
Oyer concluded her testimony with a stark warning about the implications of prioritizing political allegiance over the fair administration of justice, stating, “It should alarm all Americans that the leadership of the Department of Justice appears to value political loyalty above the fair and responsible administration of justice.”