California Sen Adam Schiff changes tune on DOJ, reams increasingly ‘Orwellian’ leadership

Sen. Adam Schiff, once a staunch defender of the Justice Department’s independence, now warns it has become an ‘Orwellian’ tool for President Donald Trump and ripe for political abuse.

The California Democrat and former U.S. prosecutor, who served four House terms before his election to the Senate last fall, has long been an outspoken Trump foe, using his former posts as chair of the House Oversight Committee and impeachment probes to urge a more independent-minded Justice Department. 

"The rule of law is a core foundation of our nation," Schiff previously told Time Magazine during Trump's first term in office. "No one, not even the president, is above it."

Schiff once served as a federal prosecutor at the Justice Department, where he helped successfully convict an ex-FBI agent on charges of spying for the Soviet Union. Throughout his later service in the House, he repeatedly defended the Justice Department as independent-minded and asserted that its career officials operate above the political fray. 

TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW BAN ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

He also chided his Republican colleagues who, in his view, too harshly criticized the agency, warning them that doing so could lead to an erosion of trust.

Fewer than four years later, however, Schiff is singing a different tune. 

Now in the Senate, the California Democrat is one of the most vocal critics, sounding the alarm about Trump's efforts to reform the Justice Department to his liking. 

On Monday, he pushed back against Trump's claim that he and other members of the House committee tasked with investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot could be subject to "investigation at the highest level," as the president threatened in a Truth Social post.

"The members of the Jan 6 Committee are all proud of our work," Schiff wrote on X, in response to Trump's remarks. "Your threats will not intimidate us. Or silence us."

Earlier this month, Schiff took aim at the current leadership of the Justice Department in a blistering floor speech, noting that the DOJ’s three most senior officials, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and John Sauer, all formerly represented Trump in criminal court proceedings. 

By so frequently claiming the Justice Department has been improperly "weaponized" against him, Schiff said, Trump has arguably given his officials a green light, "in Orwellian fashion, to do what they have accused others of doing," which is "to weaponize the department. … To use the department as a sword and as a shield."

WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY DEFENDS TRUMP'S FIRING OF INSPECTORS GENERAL

Schiff also blasted the Supreme Court decision last August that expanded the view of presidential immunity – a ruling, he said, that "has turbocharged the ability to weaponize the Department of Justice by a president who wishes to use it for that purpose."

Last month, Schiff joined other Democrats on the panel in urging the administration to turn over information that prompted their decision to remove or reassign dozens of career Justice Department officials and FBI personnel. 

Lawmakers also cited concerns about a sprawling questionnaire sent by Justice Department officials to thousands of FBI agents and supervisors in January asking detailed questions about their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot investigation.

FBI AGENTS GROUP TELLS CONGRESS TO TAKE URGENT ACTION TO PROTECT AGAINST POLITICIZATION

That questionnaire is also the subject of a lawsuit filed this year by current and former FBI agents, who are seeking to head off any retaliation or discriminatory action against personnel involved in the Jan. 6 probe. A judge is expected to hear from both parties in court later this month.

Most recently, Trump attempted to strip security clearances and access to federal government buildings for all Perkins Coie employees, a law firm he sees as opposed to his political agenda, prompting a federal judge to step in and block the order.

 "An American President is not a king – not even an 'elected' one – and his power to remove federal officers and honest civil servants like plaintiff is not absolute," U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell wrote in a court order this month that blocked one of Trump’s executive orders from taking force.

Schiff, for his part, appears to share that view.

"There could be no more frontal assault on the post-Watergate policy of having some division between the White House and the Justice Department than the Supreme Court of the United States saying, ‘Break down that wall. Use the department any way you wish. Create cases where there’s no evidence. Dismiss cases where there’s plenty of evidence. And you will never face accountability. No matter how corrupt a motive,'" Schiff said this month. 

Reached for comment about his evolving views on the Justice Department, Schiff's office pointed Fox News Digital to his previous remarks, including a February interview on MSNBC’s "The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell." Asked about his claims that Trump has weaponized the Justice Department – and the severity of the issue – Schiff responded, "We’ve had a debate about what level of constitutional crisis we’re in, and frankly, I think we’re already there."

Federal judge appointed by Trump quits group over statement on threats

A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump in 2018 announced that he had resigned from the largest association of federal judges, decrying how the group issued a rare statement last week condemning recent alleged threats against judges but stayed quiet for years while conservative members of the judiciary faced scrutiny and attack. 

Judge James C. Ho, of the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, announced his departure from the Federal Judges Association during a speaking event Saturday hosted by the conservative Federalist Society at the University of Michigan Law School. It comes in response to the 1,100-member group issuing a statement on March 5 saying in part that "judges must be permitted to do their jobs without fear of violence or intimidation of any kind." Trump and his allies have grown increasingly critical of judges who have blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and other aspects of the administration's agenda, while DOGE leader Elon Musk last month called for an "immediate wave of judicial impeachments." 

"I was very surprised by that statement. And the next morning, I sent an email to the organization saying that I wanted to resign," Ho said of the Federal Judges Association. "I researched for myself, and I also asked the association if they ever issued any such statements when Justice Thomas received attacks, or Justice Alito. Justice Kavanaugh dealt with an assassination attempt. We’ve had federal district judges in Texas and in Florida – as well as, I’m sure, other states, but those are the ones that come to mind immediately – all faced the kinds of things that that statement was complaining about and more. Did we see these statements in 2024 or 2023 or 2022? From what I can tell, no." 

WHO IS JUDGE AMIR ALI? THE BIDEN-APPOINTED FEDERAL JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP'S USAID BATTLE

"You can’t say that you’re in favor of judicial independence only when it comes to decisions that you like. That’s not protecting the judiciary, that’s politicizing the judiciary," Ho said, arguing that such statements actually harm the cause they try to further. "Because one of two things turns out to be true when you’re selective in this way. And either of these options, I think, is a bad thing. Option number one is that you’re basically lying, that you actually don’t care about this principle because you didn’t stand up for it when the shoe was on the other foot, and so you’re telling the world essentially we’re not seriously committed to judicial independence." 

"The alternative is perhaps even worse, which is that you are telling the truth – you do care about this, this principle, whether it’s judicial independence or free speech. I think this concept applies to a lot of things," Ho continued. "If you’re telling the truth, you really care about this principle, but there are just some people who have views that are so anathema to you that you don’t think they are worthy of this principle that you expound on." 

"And so what you may think is a statement born of righteousness I think is perceived by a lot of people as merely sanctimonious," he concluded. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the Federal Judges Association for comment, but they did not immediately respond.

JUDGE RULES DOGE LIKELY SUBJECT TO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS, SAYS DEPARTMENT OPERATING IN 'UNUSUAL SECRECY'

The president of the Federal Judges Association, U.S. Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, wrote in an email to members last week that the "judiciary faces growing threats, including violence, intimidation, disinformation, and unprecedented impeachments that challenge its independence," according to Reuters. 

The Federal Judges Association then released a lengthier public statement the next day that did not elaborate on specific threats against specific judges. 

It began by saying that "recent events are a clear and urgent reminder that federal judges play a crucial role in upholding our democracy as guardians of the rule of law." 

"In the history of our Republic, there has always been tension between the three separate and equal branches of the federal government, including criticism of judicial interpretations. The FJA strives to ensure that accurate information is shared with all American citizens regarding the role of the judiciary as defined in the U.S. Constitution: to impartially interpret the laws that have been created by the U.S. Congress and enforced by the Executive branch," the group said. "Specific decisions issued by judges are not formed from individual opinions, but rather are prepared against evaluation of what the ‘laws on the books’ require." 

The group commended those, including Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, "who have commented recently on the rise in criticism, threats and violence aimed at members of the judiciary."

"Irresponsible rhetoric shrouded in disinformation undermines the public’s confidence that our justice system can fulfill its constitutional duties," the statement said. "The security of federal judges and all those serving in the judicial branch of our government is fundamental to their ability to uphold the rule of law, and to fulfill their constitutional duty without fear or undue influence. Any erosion in the independence of the judiciary is a threat to our Constitution and to democratic rule of law. Ensuring judicial security is not just about protecting individuals, it is about preserving the integrity of our legal system and the public’s trust in an impartial judiciary." 

‘Delivering accountability’: GOP reps launch judicial task force to expose ‘judicial activism’

FIRST ON FOX: Republican Reps. Andrew Clyde, of Georgia, and Eli Crane, of Arizona, are launching a judicial task force "to unite members in exposing judicial activism" and target "rogue, activist judges" amid a flurry of legal challenges to the Trump agenda.

"I’m excited to lead this critical effort with my friend and fellow patriot, Congressman Eli Crane. Our Judicial Activism Accountability Task Force aims to unite members in exposing judicial activism, with the ultimate goal of impeaching rogue, activist judges," Clyde said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Clyde notably announced in February he was drafting impeachment articles against Rhode Island-based District Judge John McConnell, who is overseeing a lawsuit against President Donald Trump. McConnell, at the time, filed a motion ordering the Trump administration to comply with a previous restraining order. The order temporarily blocked the administration’s efforts to pause federal grants and loans. 

JONATHAN TURLEY: JUDGE'S SPECIAL COUNSEL RULING MAY BE THE SETBACK TRUMP ADMIN WAS LOOKING FOR

Crane and other representatives have since followed Clyde's lead, announcing impeachment articles against other judges presiding over Trump-related lawsuits. 

Clyde said he encourages other members of Congress to join the task force who "are passionate about ending abusive judicial overreach, upholding the separation of powers, and defending the U.S. Constitution," saying they "look forward to delivering accountability for the American people."

Crane, who announced he was drafting impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, told Fox News Digital in a statement that, in recent years, "leftists weaponized the judicial branch." 

The Arizona Republican said, "If these activist judges want to be politicians, they should resign and run for public office."

JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S MASS DISMISSALS OF PROBATIONARY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

"The American people delivered President Trump a mandate to disrupt the administrative state," Crane said. "These judges are violating the will of the people, and Congress has constitutional authority to impeach and convict these partisans."

Tennessee Republican Rep. Andy Ogles also announced he was drafting impeachment articles of his own following Clyde and Crane's efforts.

Ogles announced he had introduced impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Amir Ali late last month. Ali, a D.C.-based Biden appointee, recently ordered the Trump administration to pay around $2 billion in foreign aid funds to contractors with a midnight deadline.

JUDICIAL PUSHBACK ON TRUMP 'HURTING AMERICAN PEOPLE,' SAYS GOP REP LEADING IMPEACHMENT CHARGE

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts paused Ali's order after the Trump administration said it had created "an untenable payment plan at odds with the President’s obligations under Article II to protect the integrity of the federal fisc and make appropriate judgements(sic) about foreign aid – clear forms of irreparable harm."

Clyde and Crane's task force comes as the administration has become the target of more than 90 lawsuits aimed at President Donald Trump's executive orders and directives. The legal challenges cover Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) efforts to slash unnecessary government spending, and Trump's removal of various federal employees. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Clyde spoke with Fox News Digital shortly after announcing his impeachment articles against McConnell, saying the real victims of judicial pushback against Trump's policies are the American people. 

"You're not just hurting the president," Clyde said. "You're hurting the American people because they're the ones who elected him, and they're the ones who want him to do this – to exercise these specific authorities. And these judges are really denying the American people their rights."

Fox News Digital's Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

‘Delivering accountability’: GOP reps launch judicial task force to expose ‘judicial activism’

FIRST ON FOX: Republican Reps. Andrew Clyde, of Georgia, and Eli Crane, of Arizona, are launching a judicial task force "to unite members in exposing judicial activism" and target "rogue, activist judges" amid a flurry of legal challenges to the Trump agenda.

"I’m excited to lead this critical effort with my friend and fellow patriot, Congressman Eli Crane. Our Judicial Activism Accountability Task Force aims to unite members in exposing judicial activism, with the ultimate goal of impeaching rogue, activist judges," Clyde said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Clyde notably announced in February he was drafting impeachment articles against Rhode Island-based District Judge John McConnell, who is overseeing a lawsuit against President Donald Trump. McConnell, at the time, filed a motion ordering the Trump administration to comply with a previous restraining order. The order temporarily blocked the administration’s efforts to pause federal grants and loans. 

JONATHAN TURLEY: JUDGE'S SPECIAL COUNSEL RULING MAY BE THE SETBACK TRUMP ADMIN WAS LOOKING FOR

Crane and other representatives have since followed Clyde's lead, announcing impeachment articles against other judges presiding over Trump-related lawsuits. 

Clyde said he encourages other members of Congress to join the task force who "are passionate about ending abusive judicial overreach, upholding the separation of powers, and defending the U.S. Constitution," saying they "look forward to delivering accountability for the American people."

Crane, who announced he was drafting impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, told Fox News Digital in a statement that, in recent years, "leftists weaponized the judicial branch." 

The Arizona Republican said, "If these activist judges want to be politicians, they should resign and run for public office."

JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S MASS DISMISSALS OF PROBATIONARY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

"The American people delivered President Trump a mandate to disrupt the administrative state," Crane said. "These judges are violating the will of the people, and Congress has constitutional authority to impeach and convict these partisans."

Tennessee Republican Rep. Andy Ogles also announced he was drafting impeachment articles of his own following Clyde and Crane's efforts.

Ogles announced he had introduced impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Amir Ali late last month. Ali, a D.C.-based Biden appointee, recently ordered the Trump administration to pay around $2 billion in foreign aid funds to contractors with a midnight deadline.

JUDICIAL PUSHBACK ON TRUMP 'HURTING AMERICAN PEOPLE,' SAYS GOP REP LEADING IMPEACHMENT CHARGE

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts paused Ali's order after the Trump administration said it had created "an untenable payment plan at odds with the President’s obligations under Article II to protect the integrity of the federal fisc and make appropriate judgements(sic) about foreign aid – clear forms of irreparable harm."

Clyde and Crane's task force comes as the administration has become the target of more than 90 lawsuits aimed at President Donald Trump's executive orders and directives. The legal challenges cover Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) efforts to slash unnecessary government spending, and Trump's removal of various federal employees. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Clyde spoke with Fox News Digital shortly after announcing his impeachment articles against McConnell, saying the real victims of judicial pushback against Trump's policies are the American people. 

"You're not just hurting the president," Clyde said. "You're hurting the American people because they're the ones who elected him, and they're the ones who want him to do this – to exercise these specific authorities. And these judges are really denying the American people their rights."

Fox News Digital's Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

‘Delivering accountability’: GOP reps launch judicial task force to expose ‘judicial activism’

FIRST ON FOX: Republican Reps. Andrew Clyde, of Georgia, and Eli Crane, of Arizona, are launching a judicial task force "to unite members in exposing judicial activism" and target "rogue, activist judges" amid a flurry of legal challenges to the Trump agenda.

"I’m excited to lead this critical effort with my friend and fellow patriot, Congressman Eli Crane. Our Judicial Activism Accountability Task Force aims to unite members in exposing judicial activism, with the ultimate goal of impeaching rogue, activist judges," Clyde said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Clyde notably announced in February he was drafting impeachment articles against Rhode Island-based District Judge John McConnell, who is overseeing a lawsuit against President Donald Trump. McConnell, at the time, filed a motion ordering the Trump administration to comply with a previous restraining order. The order temporarily blocked the administration’s efforts to pause federal grants and loans. 

JONATHAN TURLEY: JUDGE'S SPECIAL COUNSEL RULING MAY BE THE SETBACK TRUMP ADMIN WAS LOOKING FOR

Crane and other representatives have since followed Clyde's lead, announcing impeachment articles against other judges presiding over Trump-related lawsuits. 

Clyde said he encourages other members of Congress to join the task force who "are passionate about ending abusive judicial overreach, upholding the separation of powers, and defending the U.S. Constitution," saying they "look forward to delivering accountability for the American people."

Crane, who announced he was drafting impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, told Fox News Digital in a statement that, in recent years, "leftists weaponized the judicial branch." 

The Arizona Republican said, "If these activist judges want to be politicians, they should resign and run for public office."

JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S MASS DISMISSALS OF PROBATIONARY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

"The American people delivered President Trump a mandate to disrupt the administrative state," Crane said. "These judges are violating the will of the people, and Congress has constitutional authority to impeach and convict these partisans."

Tennessee Republican Rep. Andy Ogles also announced he was drafting impeachment articles of his own following Clyde and Crane's efforts.

Ogles announced he had introduced impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Amir Ali late last month. Ali, a D.C.-based Biden appointee, recently ordered the Trump administration to pay around $2 billion in foreign aid funds to contractors with a midnight deadline.

JUDICIAL PUSHBACK ON TRUMP 'HURTING AMERICAN PEOPLE,' SAYS GOP REP LEADING IMPEACHMENT CHARGE

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts paused Ali's order after the Trump administration said it had created "an untenable payment plan at odds with the President’s obligations under Article II to protect the integrity of the federal fisc and make appropriate judgements(sic) about foreign aid – clear forms of irreparable harm."

Clyde and Crane's task force comes as the administration has become the target of more than 90 lawsuits aimed at President Donald Trump's executive orders and directives. The legal challenges cover Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) efforts to slash unnecessary government spending, and Trump's removal of various federal employees. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Clyde spoke with Fox News Digital shortly after announcing his impeachment articles against McConnell, saying the real victims of judicial pushback against Trump's policies are the American people. 

"You're not just hurting the president," Clyde said. "You're hurting the American people because they're the ones who elected him, and they're the ones who want him to do this – to exercise these specific authorities. And these judges are really denying the American people their rights."

Fox News Digital's Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

‘Highly qualified’: Former state AGs urge Senate to confirm Bondi to lead Justice Department


FIRST ON FOX: A group of more than 60 former Democratic and Republican attorneys general sent a new letter to Senate leaders Thursday urging the confirmation of Pam Bondi to head up the Department of Justice, praising what they described as Bondi’s wealth of prosecutorial experience— including during her eight years as Florida’s top prosecutor—that they said makes her especially qualified for the role. 

The letter was previewed exclusively to Fox News Digital and includes the signatures of more than 20 Democratic attorneys general or attorneys general appointed by Democratic governors. 

The group praised Bondi’s work across the party and state lines during her time as Florida’s attorney general and as a state prosecutor in Hillsborough County, where she worked for 18 years. 

"Many of us have worked directly with Attorney General Bondi and have firsthand knowledge of her fitness for the office," the former attorneys general said in the letter. "We believe that her wealth of prosecutorial experience and commitment to public service make General Bondi a highly qualified nominee for Attorney General of the United States." 

MORE THAN 100 FORMER JUSTICE DEPT OFFICIALS URGE SENATE TO CONFIRM PAM BONDI AS AG

The letter praised what signatories described as Bondi’s "unwavering" commitment to public safety and the rule of law in her time in the Sunshine State, where she sought to crack down on violent crime, protect consumers and combat the opioid crisis— which was at its height when she was elected as attorney general in 2010.

Bondi "was and remains a valued and respected member of the State Attorney General community," they wrote. "Thus, we are confident that she will serve with distinction as United States Attorney General."

The letter comes just hours after the Senate Judiciary Committee announced the official dates for Bondi's confirmation hearing later this month.

TRUMP'S AG PICK HAS ‘HISTORY OF CONSENSUS BUILDING’

Bondi is expected to be confirmed in the Republican-majority chamber. Earlier this week, a group of more than 100 former Justice Department officials sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee urging her confirmation.

Still, the new letter of support from the state attorneys general comes just hours after the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., issued a statement Wednesday evening expressing fresh reservations about Bondi following their meeting — citing in particular Bondi’s work defending President-elect Donald Trump in his impeachment proceedings and following the 2020 election.

"The role of the Attorney General is to oversee an independent Justice Department that upholds the rule of law and is free of undue political influence," Durbin said in a statement. 

"Given Ms. Bondi’s responses to my questions, I remain concerned about her ability to serve as an Attorney General who will put her oath to the Constitution ahead of her fealty to Donald Trump." 

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Jordan demands Smith retain all records related to Trump prosecutions as special counsel’s office winds down

FIRST ON FOX: The House Judiciary Committee is concerned that special counsel Jack Smith and prosecutors involved in the investigations of now President-elect Donald Trump will "purge" records to skirt oversight and is demanding they produce to Congress all documents related to the probes before the end of the month, Fox News Digital has learned. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., penned a letter to Smith on Friday, obtained by Fox News Digital. 

TRUMP VOWS TO LEAD ‘GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA' IN VICTORY SPEECH: ’FIX EVERYTHING'

"The Committee on the Judiciary is continuing its oversight of the Department of Justice and the Office of Special Counsel. According to recent public reports, prosecutors in your office have been ‘gaming out legal options’ in the event that President Donald Trump won the election," they wrote. "With President Trump’s decisive victory this week, we are concerned that the Office of Special Counsel may attempt to purge relevant records, communications, and documents responsive to our numerous requests for information." 

Jordan and Loudermilk warned that the Office of Special Counsel "is not immune from transparency or above accountability for its actions." 

"We reiterate our requests, which are itemized in the attached appendix and incorporated herein, and ask that you produce the entirety of the requested material as soon as possible but no later than November 22, 2024," they wrote. 

Jordan and Loudermilk are demanding Smith turn over information about the use of FBI personnel on his team — a request first made in June 2023 — and whether any of those FBI employees "previously worked on any other matters concerning President Trump." 

They also renewed their request from August 2023, demanding records relating to Smith and prosecutor Jay Bratt visiting the White House or Executive Office of the President; a request from September 2023 for records related to lawyer Stanley Woodward—who represented Trump aide Walt Nauta; a request from December 2023 for communications between Attorney General Merrick Garland and the special counsel’s team; and more. 

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

The Justice Department is looking to wind down two federal criminal cases against President-elect Trump as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in the White House — a decision that upholds a long-standing policy that prevents Justice Department attorneys from prosecuting a sitting president. 

DOJ officials have cited a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel filed in 2000, which upholds a Watergate-era argument that asserts it is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for the Justice Department to investigate a sitting president. 

It further notes that such proceedings would "unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the Presidency."  

"In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’" the memo said in conclusion.

Smith was leading an investigation into the alleged retention of classified records. Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges stemming from that probe. 

The case was eventually tossed completely by a federal judge in Florida, who ruled that Smith was improperly and unlawfully appointed as special counsel. 

Smith also took over an investigation into alleged 2020 election interference. Trump also pleaded not guilty, but his attorneys took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court to argue on the basis of presidential immunity. 

The high court ruled that Trump was immune from prosecution for official presidential acts, forcing Smith to file a new indictment. Trump pleaded not guilty to those new charges as well. Trump attorneys are now seeking to have the election interference charges dropped in Washington, D.C., similarly alleging that Smith was appointed unlawfully. 

‘Pulling an Alvin Bragg’: Left-wing DA’s ‘flimsy’ suit against Elon Musk’s $1M giveaway slammed by expert

Left-wing Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner filed a lawsuit against tech billionaire Elon Musk over his $1 million giveaway amid the highly anticipated Pennsylvania election – a suit that is being slammed as riddled with legal issues by an expert. 

"As a prosecutor for the city and county of Philadelphia, Krasner has no legal ability to prosecute anyone for alleged violations of federal law. So instead, he is pulling an Alvin Bragg by concocting a flimsy legal theory that Musk somehow is violating Pennsylvania’s lottery law," Cully Stimson, deputy director of the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center of Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, wrote in a Daily Signal commentary piece published Monday. 

Stimson compared the suit to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charging former President Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records, which prosecutors linked during the spring 2024 trial to an election scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election. Trump was found guilty in the case, and has since maintained his innocence as legal experts rallied that the case was an "absolute joke" and "witch hunt" against the 45th president. 

Krasner filed a lawsuit Monday against Musk and his super PAC, the America PAC, for "running an illegal lottery in Philadelphia" and across the state. 

Musk announced earlier this month that voters in battleground states, such as Pennsylvania or Michigan, were eligible for a $1 million a day giveaway after signing the America PAC’s petition backing the Constitution. Musk endorsed Trump in July, and recently joined him on the campaign trail to rally support for his re-election bid, most notably in the key battleground state of Pennsylvania. 

PHILADELPHIA DA LARRY KRASNER IMPEACHED BY PENNSYLVANIA LAWMAKERS IN GOP-LED EFFORT: 'CRISIS OF CRIME'

The initiative outlines that it only applies to registered voters in the battleground states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin and North Carolina, and if they sign the petition. 

"The First and Second Amendments guarantee freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. By signing below, I am pledging my support for the First and Second Amendments," the petition reads. 

HERE'S HOW ELON MUSK'S $1M A DAY GIVEAWAY TO BATTLEGROUND VOTERS WORKS

Musk has already announced winners for the giveaway, including one in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, on Saturday. 

"Oct 22 - Nov 5: Each day, one petition signer from either PA, GA, NV, AZ, MI, WI, or NC will earn $1,000,000," the America PAC website reads. 

Stimson wrote that Krasner is "one of George Soros’ bought-and-paid-for district attorneys" who "doesn’t care about the law" and launched the suit to quench his alleged thirst "for media attention."

"Musk isn’t paying individuals to register to vote; he is paying already-registered voters to sign a petition, which is entirely lawful," Stimson explained. 

ELON GOES ON CAMPAIGN BLITZ AGAINST GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS, VOWS TO REVEAL BIZARRE ALLEGED SCHEMES

"​​In his civil complaint against Musk, Krasner asserts that by ‘lulling’ registered voters into giving their personal identifying information such as their postal address, cellphone number, and email address, voters have paid Musk consideration – as when a person gives a dollar to purchase a Mega Millions lottery ticket," he continued. 

In his suit, Krasner cited the 1976 case "Commonwealth v. Lane," which detailed that under Pennsylvania law, a lottery is deemed unlawful under three elements: "(1) a prize to be won; (2) a winner to be determined by chance; and (3) the payment of a consideration by the player." 

Stimson said the first two elements are satisfied when considering the Musk giveaway, but "the third element is nowhere to be found."

"Consideration is the payment of money, which is completely lacking in the Musk proposal. Registered voters didn’t pay money to sign the petition. Their personally identifiable information isn’t, under either the Lane case or state law, ‘consideration,’" Stimson explained. 

PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT DEBATES FUTURE OF IMPEACHMENT TRIAL FOR PHILADELPHIA PROSECUTOR LARRY KRASNER

Stimson, whose background includes extensive investigations into "rogue" prosecutors who have politically benefited from donations made by left-wing billionaire George Soros, added in his commentary piece that it’s a "bit rich of Krasner to sue Musk, since the Philadelphia DA is a two-time violator of state campaign finance laws."

Stimson cited previous research that found Krasner received $1.7 million from Soros-funded groups during his 2017 election, and an additional $1.25 million from the same groups during his 2021 re-election campaign. 

FAR-LEFT PHILADELPHIA DA LARRY KRASNER'S COMPANY OWES $86,000 IN UNPAID TAXES

"In both races, he broke campaign finance laws and got into hot water with Philadelphia’s Board of Ethics."

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported in 2019 that Krasner settled with the ethics board over accepting more than $11,000 in excess in-kind contributions from the Soros-backed Real Justice PAC. Krasner paid a $4,000 fine and agreed to reimburse the city for the excess in-kind contribution from the PAC, while the Real Justice PAC agreed to pay $8,000 in penalties.

Following his 2021 re-election, Krasner’s campaign and the Real Justice PAC again admitted to breaking campaign finance law. Krasner agreed to pay $10,000 in penalties, while the Real Justice PAC agreed to pay $30,000 in penalties, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that year.

WIDOW OF SLAIN PHILADELPHIA POLICE OFFICER BLAMES PROGRESSIVE POLICIES OF DA LARRY KRASNER FOR HUSBAND'S DEATH

"Krasner has been a disaster as Philadelphia’s district attorney," Stimson wrote. "... Crime has exploded in Philly as a result of Krasner’s pro-criminal, anti-victim, cop-hating policies."

"In the five years before he was elected, an average of 271 homicides occurred per year. Since he was elected in 2017, an average of 368 homicides per year have occurred – an ‘extra’ 97 dead bodies per year."

Fox News Digital reached out to Krasner’s office for a response to Stimson’s arguments, but did not receive a reply. 

Following Musk’s announcement of the giveaway this month, Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro set the stage that it would likely come under legal scrutiny. 

"I think there are real questions with how he is spending money in this race, how the dark money is flowing, not just into Pennsylvania, but apparently now into the pockets of Pennsylvanians. That is deeply concerning," Shapiro said on NBC’s "Meet the Press."

PHILADELPHIA'S FORMER DEMOCRATIC MAYOR SLAMS SOROS-FUNDED DA FOR REFUSING TO CALL MURDER SURGE A 'CRISIS'

He continued, "Look, Musk, obviously has a right to be able to express his views, and he’s made it very, very clear that he supports Donald Trump, and we have a difference of opinion. I don’t deny him that right, but when you start flowing this kind of money into politics, I think it raises serious questions that folks may want to take a look at."

"You think it might not be legal, yes or no?" host Kristen Welker asked.

Shapiro responded, "I think it’s something that law enforcement can take a look at."

Musk announced the eighth winner of the giveaway on Saturday in Lancaster, home to Pennsylvania’s rolling hills dotted with Amish farms, where he again touted the petition backing the Constitution. 

"We're trying to get attention for this very important petition to support the Constitution. And, it's like, if we, you know – we need the right to free speech; we need the right to bear arms," Musk said at the rally in Lancaster.

"So we're going to be giving out a million dollars every day through Nov. 5," he continued. "And also, all you have to do is sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendments. That's it. You don't even have to vote. It'd be nice if you voted, but you don't have to. And then just basically sign something you already believe in, and you get a test to win a million dollars every day from now through the election."