President Donald Trump has yanked the security clearances of 37 current and former national security officials, an unprecedented move that has gutted parts of the intelligence community.

Since returning to the White House, Trump has wielded clearances as a political weapon, pulling them from perceived enemies, such as former President Joe Biden, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and other top Democrats. Now the purge has widened to career intelligence and some of the government’s most experienced analysts.

Several of those targeted had been involved in Russian interference or foreign election threats. And many had signed a 2019 letter warning that Trump’s dealings with Ukraine were serious enough to warrant impeachment proceedings. That letter resurfaced several weeks ago, when far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer posted it on X and demanded that “dozens of anti-Trump officials from the CIA and [National Security Council]” who signed it lose their clearances.

Trump and his intelligence head, Tulsi Gabbard, delivered. Among those affected were Shelby Pierson, the official who warned Congress about Russia’s influence in 2020, as well as an undercover CIA analyst and Vinh X. Nguyen, a data scientist at the National Security Agency whose expertise in artificial intelligence had made him invaluable to the agency. Nguyen’s ouster stunned former colleagues, who warned his removal could set U.S. technology development back years.

The revocations are part of a broader campaign from Trump and Gabbard, echoing the president’s unfounded claims that intelligence agencies manipulated assessments about Russian interference in 2016. On Tuesday, Gabbard framed her actions as rooting out “politicization or weaponization of intelligence” but offered no evidence that the officials in question had mishandled classified material.

“Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right,” she wrote in a post on X, saying her actions followed Trump’s direction.

Critics say the opposite is true: The clearances themselves are being politicized. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Democratic vice chair, blasted the effort as a smokescreen.

“Hey it’s a day ending in ‘Y’ so Tulsi Gabbard has launched yet another weird gambit to distract from the administration’s failure to release the Epstein files,” he wrote on social media. Warner also told The New York Times that he’s introducing legislation to establish clear standards for granting and revoking clearances.

But Trump and Gabbard aren't acting alone. Attorney General Pam Bondi has convened a task force to reexamine the 2016 intelligence review, while CIA Director John Ratcliffe has declassified internal reports and even referred former CIA Director John Brennan to the FBI for further investigation. Together, the moves amount to a wholesale attempt to rewrite the history of Russian election interference.

The practical effects are mixed. Some of the 37 may not have held active clearances or government contracts. For current officials, losing clearance means immediate dismissal. For former officials, it strips them of the ability to consult or advise—roles many still play.

However, the symbolism is clear. Trump has weaponized the clearance system to punish critics, a strategy that will chill dissent inside agencies already wary of contradicting the White House.

Even those caught up in the dragnet mocked the move. When Trump pulled James’ clearance earlier this year, she shot back: “What security clearance?”

For lawyers like Mark Zaid, who represents intelligence officials and lost his own clearance under Trump, the hypocrisy is glaring. 

“These are unlawful and unconstitutional decisions that deviate from well-settled, decades-old laws and policies that sought to protect against just this type of action,” Zaid said in a statement to The Associated Press and others, calling the current intelligence leadership “a grave danger to national security.”