Tag Archives: DOJ

New Gun Restoration Rule Sends DOJ Fox to Guard the Henhouse – Update for August 27, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

DOJ ADOPTS FINAL GUN RIGHTS RESTORATION RULE

The Dept of Justice last week published a final rule adopting a procedure for restoring gun rights for people convicted of certain nonviolent felonies.

It’s a victory for the government’s goal of being the gatekeeper on 2nd Amendment rights. It’s a loser for everyone else.

The process will be restrictive and vigorous, coming with a long list of “presumptive disqualifiers.” Those include a conviction at any time in the past for a host of crimes of violence, for brandishing a gun, for witness tampering, or if you’re subject to sex offender registration (to name just a few). There is a 10-year wait for people convicted of drug offense or prior misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence. Gun rights won’t be restored if your conviction is less than five years old or you’re still locked up or on supervised release.

The application requires copies of prior criminal judgments, indictments, plea agreements and a state criminal history for the past 25 years. You must provide contact information for three character references, none of whom is prohibited from possessing a gun. Finally, you have to submit electronic fingerprints.

The program will be run by the Office of Pardon Attorney, a fact which does not provide comfort that decisions on gun rights – given that OPA as recently as July 1st had a 20,000-document backlog of petitions for clemency –  will be made quickly.

A curious and not-very-promising provision of the program is that it will be open on September 25 for six weeks only to “invited candidates.”  No one seems to have explored who the “invited candidates” might be, but given the Administration’s track record of favoring people with money, celebrity status and connections, the chance that the program may be flooded with favored applicants is real. Mel Gibson got his rights back, but there are plenty of MAGA-loving people with money or status in line behind him.

On November 4, the program will open to the public for 5,000 candidates. On January 4, 2027, the process will open to additional candidates, with a $30 processing fee required for the first time.

If your application is denied, you will have the right of judicial review.

Associated Press hopefully reported that the program is a victory for Second Amendment advocates who have long pushed for nonviolent people with felony convictions to be given a pathway to regain their legal right to own firearms.” It quoted Blanche as saying, “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and the federal government should not permanently deprive Americans of a constitutional right without regard to whether they pose a danger to public safety,” Blanche said in a statement. The attorney general said the new process will protect “public safety while giving deserving Americans a real path to restoration.”

However, the program may be a fig leaf that lets the Administration avoid a Supreme Court showdown over the 2ndAmendment and 18 USC 922(g) while deciding for itself whose 2nd Amendment rights will be honored and whose will be ignored. If § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied to some people despite their convictions, setting up a discretionary government process whereby the unconstitutionality may be corrected in the future is hardly comforting. The government may as well set up a panel to decide that you can exercise your 1st Amendment rights to make statements or publish flyers after you submit to a bureaucratic review process.

If a conviction is insufficient to strip 2nd Amendment rights from the start, an argument that you should be convicted of a § 922(g)(1) offense anyway because you didn’t petition the government to give you what you always were constitutionally entitled to is scary.  

Look at Ray Luna.

Ray was convicted of a drug possession felony. Much later, he was caught with a gun and charged as an 18 USC § 922(g) felon in possession. The District Court dismissed the indictment, holding that disarmament over a mere possession conviction – even a felony one z– violated Ray’s 2nd Amendment rights.

The government – the same government that will grant or deny you your 2nd Amendment rights – appealed to the 5th Circuit, arguing that it had information that Ray had really been trafficking drugs, despite the fact that he had not been charged with or convicted of that. Even if he had not, the US Attorney contended, drug possession was analogous to colonial-era laws regulating trafficking in tobacco. This week, the 5th agreed with the District Court and threw out the indictment:

[W]e consider only whether Luna’s predicate felony supports disarmament… For the purposes of assessing [a defendant’s] predicate offenses under § 922(g)(1), we may consider prior convictions that are ‘punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year… Against the government’s request to ‘account [for] [the defendant’s] entire record, which is necessary to properly assess the extent of his violent conduct,’ we reject such an invitation and instead confine our inquiry to [the defendant’s prior] conviction—the only predicate § 922(g)(1) offense—based on the rule of orderliness.

Calvin, remember that time you laid out Susie Derkins with the snowball when you were both in 1st grade? If you’re convicted of a nonviolent white-collar crime 40 years in the future, you can bet the DOJ will resurrect the Derkins incident as proof that you should be denied possession of grandpa’s antique .22.

Some 2nd Amendment protection: Sending the foxes to guard the 2nd Amendment henhouse.

Federal Register, Application for Relief From Disabilities Imposed by Federal Laws With Respect to the Acquisition, Receipt, Transfer, Shipment, Transportation, or Possession of Firearms (August 20, 2026)

Associated Press, Justice Department creates a new pathway to restore gun rights for some convicted of felonies (August 17, 2026)

United States v. Luna, Case No. 25-40272, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 25846 (5th Cir. Aug. 24, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

Goodbye and Good Riddance to Pardon Attorney… But Nothing’s Likely to Change – Update for August 24, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

PARDON ATTORNEY ED MARTIN RESIGNS

US Pardon Attorney Ed Martin, a staunch ally of President Donald Trump who clashed with other officials and senators over his undisciplined handling of investigations, is leaving his post, President Trump said in a social media post last Friday.

“The departure caps Martin’s short, contentious career at the Justice Department, where he served as the interim US attorney for DC. and, most recently, as the department’s top pardon attorney,” the Washington Post reported on Saturday, helping to determine who should receive pardons from the president.

Martin, who represented several January 6th rioters before Trump’s second term, was originally appointed by Trump to serve as US Attorney for the District of Columbia, one of the highest-profile US Attorney positions in the government.

But Trump withdrew the nomination after Martin’s performance as interim US Attorney was so contentious that he lacked enough support even in a Republican-led Senate to win confirmation.

 Trump then named Martin to the dual position of head of the DOJ’s so-called Weaponization Working Group and US Pardon Attorney. He replaced Pardon Attorney Elizabeth Oyer, who was fired because she refused to support restoration of gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, disqualified under 18 USC 922(g)(9) as a result of a 2011 domestic violence misdemeanor conviction.

But Martin was too much even for the Trump-selected DOJ top bosses, who were “put off by Martin’s aggressive and unorthodox style,” according to the Post. Last February, Martin was fired from his Weaponization Work Group role and stripped of most of his DOJ responsibilities. He was exiled to the Northeast Washington Pardon Office, some distance from Justice Department headquarters.

At the time, rumors suggested he would resign as Pardon Attorney within a few weeks, but it took six months instead.

Under Martin, Trump pardoned a number of people who donated to his campaign or affiliated entities, were allies, or otherwise had been convicted of offenses that Trump saw as innocuous (such as tampering with diesel engine emissions). At the same time, predictions of widespread general commutations – such as the rumored 250 pardons on the nation’s 250th birthday – never materialized.

A report issued last Friday by Rep Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, accused Trump of running a “sprawling pay-to-play clemency industry that has emerged around [the] White House.” The report alleges that Trump has sidelined the traditional DOJ Office of Pardon Attorney process and replaced it with a “pay-to-play” system in which wealthy applicants use political contributions, Trump family business ties, and well-connected Trump insiders to obtain presidential pardons and commutations.

Raskin said:

Donald Trump has taken one of the most solemn constitutional powers of the presidency and turned it into a bustling marketplace for insider political influence and unjust personal enrichment. ‘Pardons, Inc.’ has a simple business model: wealthy white-collar criminals and drug traffickers hire Trump insiders, pour money into his political operation or cultivate his family’s financial interests, and suddenly the doors of the White House swing open for a pardon, commutation, and forgiveness of all fines and financial restitution owed. Meanwhile, thousands of imprisoned Americans without elite MAGA connections who show genuine contrition, have paid restitution to their victims and are seeking mercy sit endlessly in limbo.

Goodbye, Ed. We baked you a cake...

Not that this is surprising. Martin has always described his philosophy as ‘No MAGA left behind’ and has used his office to privilege clemency applications from the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and the two men convicted of plotting to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer,” the report stated.

The OPA traditionally has been opaque, painfully slow, and very conservative in recommending prisoners for clemency. But at least it was honest. Don’t expect any replacement Pardon Attorney for Ed Martin to return the office to a meaningful or forthright role in the pardon or commutation process.

Washington Post, Ed Martin leaving Justice Dept. after tumultuous tenure that alienated colleagues (August 21, 2026)

The Hill, Controversial attorney Ed Martin leaving Justice Department (August 21, 2026)

House Judiciary Committee Democrats, Pardons, Inc.: How Trump and His Clemency-for-Cash Racket Let White-Collar Criminals and International Drug Dealers Walk Free and Dodge Billions in Restitution Owed to Their Victims (August 21, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

DOJ Continues To Circle the Drain – Update for July 23, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

TOUGH TIMES FOR PROSECUTORS

The Dept of Justice is now requiring all Criminal Division Assistant U.S. Attorneys to maintain at least 25 open cases, “tightening the Trump administration’s grip on operational decisions previously left to US attorneys,” according to Bloomberg Law.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s office communicated the informal “25 open matters” threshold to all 93 U.S. attorneys in recent weeks, with an emphasis on driving up public safety and fraud statistics, four people familiar with the new policy told Bloomberg Law. A formal policy change is still under development, they said.

The new policy comes as DOJ brass try to dispel criticism over personnel departures by purporting to show that the Department is doing more with less.

DOJ has hemorrhaged thousands of veteran attorneys since Trump returned to office due to the President’s revenge campaigns, immigration crackdown, and increasingly overwhelming workloads, Daily Beast reported last week.

The government has lowered hiring standards and offered signing bonuses, despite historically being deluged with applications from lawyers who were happy to take a pay cut in exchange for the prestige of DOJ service.

“A one-size-fits-all policy is unworkable,” said Mark Yancey, a former senior official in the DOJ’s Executive Office for US Attorneys. “These things need to be worked at the district level by the US attorney.”

The quota runs the risk of prosecutors feeling pressured to bring cases with insufficient evidence just to hit their targets, Yancey told Bloomberg Law.

Last week, Blanche appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a hearing on his nomination to be the next Attorney General.  In the runup to the hearing, a letter signed by 2,649 lawyers and legal professionals was delivered to the Senate urging rejection of Blanche as AG.

“No one in the history of the Justice Department has moved directly from representing a president in criminal proceedings to running the institution that prosecuted those cases,” said Traci Feit Love, Executive Director of Lawyers for Good Government. “Todd Blanche isn’t America’s Attorney General. He is Donald Trump’s personal fixer with a federal badge. The Senate has a constitutional obligation to say no.”

During his confirmation hearing, Blanche was braced by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) over BOP’s decision to place Ghislaine Maxwell (convicted of helping Jeffrey Epstrein commit sex and trafficking offenses) in a camp, a move some have alleged was in exchange for her testifying that President Trump committed no sex offenses with Epstein. Blanche told Booker that Maxwell was “receiving threats,” which merited the transfer.

Booker argued that under BOP policies, an inmate who receives threats is moved to solitary confinement, not to a minimum-security prison camp.

Blanche countered: “That’s not always true,” but Booker rejected that claim. “What is true is that someone who is accused of child sex trafficking under the Bureau of Prisons’ own policies is not put in a facility like this that seems clearly like a reward,” he said.

What the exchange failed to note that a May 2026 change in BOP designation policy I reported on last month grants the Attorney General the right to make any designation decision he or she pleases regardless of BOP policy. The unheralded change in designation policy that has been in place for 135 years provides ex post facto authority for the  Maxwell placement in a camp, as well as a tool that can be abused in years to come to benefit the Administration’s friends and punish its foes.

Questions over Blanche’s role in the DOJ “anti-weaponization” fund and in handling the Epstein files have left at least two Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee undecided. If just one votes ‘no,’ that could block the acting attorney general’s nomination from moving forward. A vote is likely later this month.

US Law Week, DOJ Sets Case Quotas for Line Prosecutors in Push to Boost Stats (July 13, 2026)

Daily Beast, Trump Justice Department Scrambles as Lawyers Flee in Droves (July 14, 2026)

Letter to Senators Grassley and Durbin, Senate Judiciary Committee (July 10, 2026)

The Hill, Booker: ‘Absurdity’ for Blanche to be concerned about Maxwell safety (July 16, 2026)

Christian Science Monitor, Blanche’s nomination for attorney general uncertain after hearing (July 17, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

Some Odds and Ends – Update for June 4, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

NOTES FROM ALL OVER

Gunning for Restoration:  Fourteen months ago, the Dept of Justice restored rights to several people prohibited by 18 USC § 922(g) from owning guns (including actor Mel Gibson). DOJ announced that it was planning a program to restore firearms rights for nonviolent offenders. A rulemaking proceeding followed, with a comment period that ended seven months ago.

Last Thursday, the DOJ announced a new batch of rights restorations. However, it was limited to just four people, and the DOJ backdated it to the tenure of former Attorney General Pam Bondi. The announcement said nothing about the DOJ’s plan to standardize the rights restoration process.

Gun law and policy newsletter The Reload reported last week that “Thursday’s filing shows little progress, but it does connect to one of the overarching issues with the DOJ’s rights restoration approach. That’s because of the four men former AG Bondi picked, one had filed a Second Amendment lawsuit challenging his firearms prohibition.”

The Reload, Analysis: Where is DOJ’s Gun Rights Restoration Plan? (May 29, 2026)

Who Can Trust DOJ?  A jaw-dropping mea culpa played out in federal district court in Chicago last week, as the US Attorney himself appeared before US District Judge April Perry to apologize for what The New York Times called a “remarkable list of grand jury errors in a case that was dismissed against four Democratic activists about to face trial for impeding the police during a protest last fall at a suburban immigration detention facility.”

The Assistant US Attorney handling the grand jury talked to jurors outside of the courtroom, coaching them to indict. The government dismissed several grand jurors deemed insufficiently willing to approve the indictment. Then, the AUSA doctored the grand jury transcripts to hide what he had done.

The Times said, “[T]he mistakes also pointed to a more important problem: As Mr. Trump has demanded more and more charges against those he perceives as his opponents, prosecutors have felt pressure to push weak cases through grand juries. And that, in turn, has led to an erosion in faith in the Justice Department by both the grand jurors themselves and the judges considering the cases.”

“Your sole goal is to do justice. Your client is justice itself,” Judge Perry told the US attorney. “I do believe deeply in the presumption of regularity and that most government attorneys are doing the best they can to do the right thing. That trust has been broken.”

The New York Times, As Trump Politicizes Justice Dept., Prosecutors Struggle With Grand Juries (May 26, 2026)

Free the Weed: In a May 22 letter to President Donald Trump and Pardon Czar Alice Marie Johnson, 28 Democratic senators and representatives, along with Bernie Sanders (I-VT), asked the administration to pardon everyone in federal prison for non-violent marijuana crimes.

The letter notes that the Administration’s decision to move marijuana from Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule III “does not provide relief for anyone currently in federal prison from a marijuana conviction.” The letter observed that the Sentencing Commission estimates that about 3,000 people are serving time for pot trafficking offenses.

The legislators wrote, “The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is plagued by capacity issues, both overcrowded 7 and understaffed.8 While it won’t solve the structural issues that have led us here, we believe that commuting the sentences of people with marijuana offenses would both address the overly harsh sentences while simultaneously allowing BOP to focus resources where they are needed most.”

Letter to Donald Trump (May 22, 2026)

Sentencing Commission Quick Facts Released: The US Sentencing Commission regularly releases “Quick Facts,” short data documents that make for an interesting read as they fulfill the USSC’s goal of giving “readers basic facts about a single area of federal crime in an easy-to-read, two-page format.”

The Commission has issued a spate of new “Quick Facts” publications based on its latest Fiscal Year data.  The newest set of postings by the USSC on the “Quick Facts” page covering a range of offenses and offenders, including Guidelines Career Offenders, illegal reentry, alien smuggling, drug trafficking (including separate publications focused on fentanyl, fentanyl analogue and methamphetamine trafficking), theft and fraud, healthcare fraud, money laundering and government benefits fraud.

USSC, Quick Facts (May 19, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

USP Canaan Is Not the Promised Land, Inspector General Finds – Update for May 26, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL SLAMS LOCKDOWNS, HEALTHCARE, RESTRAINTS AT USP CANAAN

Biblically, the phrase “land flowing with milk and honey” describes Canaan, roughly the area encompassed by Israel, Jordan, most of Lebanon and Syria. The phrase symbolized agricultural prosperity, abundance, and God’s provision.

According to a report issued by the Dept of Justice Office of Inspector General last week, USP Canaan (Waymart, PA) is nowhere close to being the Promised Land.

The Inspector General’s report identified several “serious issues” with treatment of inmates, contraband and employee practices at USP Canaan found during a June 2025 inspection.

The OIG criticized improper use of 4-point restraints on inmates, too-frequent use of institution-wide lockdowns, the prison’s ability to provide healthcare to inmates, and inappropriate imagery and demeaning language in employee spaces.

The OIG found that USP Canaan frequently restricted the movement of general population inmates when the SHU was full. When inmates who would normally be assigned to the Special Housing Unit had to remain in general population housing units because the SHU was over capacity, the Report found, “USP Canaan significantly limited inmate movement in those units to maintain security. On about two-thirds of days in a 4-month period we examined, inmates housed in regular, non-SHU housing units were confined to their cells for all or most of the day. These frequent restrictions disrupted institution-wide functions and activities of general population inmates.”

As for the facility’s enthusiastic use of four-point restraints in the SHU, Deputy Inspector Bill Blier said, “Multiple USP Canaan employees told us they had seen [the] restraints applied too tightly, which caused the hands of restrained inmates to swell and become discolored. While BOP policy allows for use of restraints in certain situations, it is impermissible to cause physical pain or extreme discomfort.”

The Report found that as of the June 2025 inspection, Canaan had been without an on-site, full-time physician for 2.5 years. Several Health Services Department employees told OIG that “the lack of an on-site physician contributed to delays in conducting required examinations for inmates arriving at the institution. BOP policy requires inmates with chronic conditions or mental health concerns to be seen by a mid-level provider or physician within 14 days of arrival. However, 61 such appointments were past the BOP’s required timeframe for completion as of January 2025. By January 2026, the number had increased to 94 overdue appointments.

The inspection also found inconsistencies with delivering medication, expired medical supplies and delays in providing healthcare and lab testing.

“We also observed unsafe practices in dental services, specifically sharp dental surgical tools and chloroform stored in unlocked cabinets near inmates,” OIG reported.

Blier said inspectors observed prison employees using “inappropriate and demeaning language” toward inmates and other employees, as well as inappropriate imagery in employee areas.

The report makes nine recommendations to correct the issues. The BOP agreed with all of them, and in the appendices of the report, outlined the steps that have been taken over the past year to rectify each situation.

Previously, the OIG has conducted similar inspections on FCI Waseca, FCI Tallahassee, FMC Devens, FCI Sheridan and FDC SeaTac.

OIG, Inspection of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ US Penitentiary Canaan (Report No. 26-055, May 21, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

Government Behaving Badly – Update for March 16, 2026

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

‘THIS JOB SUCKS’ DESCRIBES THE CURRENT STATE OF DOJ

The wheels appear to be coming off the trucks at the Dept of Justice.

The Atlantic reported last month that DOJ had lost nearly 10,000 employees from Nov 2024 to Nov 2025. U.S. Attorneys’ offices have shed 14% of their workforce, a staggering one-year reduction unlike anything the department has seen in recent memory, former officials told The New York Times.

It’s not surprising. As (now former) AUSA Julie Le told a Minnesota district judge in open court, “The system sucks. This job sucks. I wish you could hold me in contempt so that I could get 24 hours of sleep.” Le had been assigned 88 cases in less than a month, according to an NBC News review of federal court records.

What’s worse for the government, the U.S. Attorneys’ offices – long a plum job for outstanding young lawyers – are facing serious recruiting problems. Chad Mizelle, a former chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, posted an unusual solicitation on the X formerly known as Twitter in early February:

“If you are a lawyer, are interested in being an AUSA, and support President Trump and anti-crime agenda, [direct message] me.”

The New York Times observed that the “post reflected the prevailing sentiment inside the department — that Mr. Trump has the right to hire only those willing to execute his agenda. It also highlighted the dynamic that appears to be contributing to the very staffing shortages Mr. Mizelle tried to address. The intermingling of law enforcement and political goals has made the department, long a magnet for platinum legal talent, an unappealing landing spot…”

The number of DOJ and AUSA applications is down significantly, officials told the Times, even as Trump loyalists have publicized vacancies through official and unconventional channels. One former prosecutor who served on a hiring committee in the U.S. Attorney’s offices for the Central District of California, said that candidates who expressed support for Trump policies were often ahead of applicants, even candidates with weak academic records and little litigation experience.

Meanwhile, the diminished numbers at DOJ and the U.S. Attorneys’ offices are being called on to do a lot more. The Atlantic said DOJ lawyers spent weeks vetting the Jeffrey Epstein files in response to the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The DOJ dedicated hundreds of lawyers, including more than 125 from the Southern District of New York, to reviewing over two million documents in the case.

“Add to that,” the Atlantic said, “a backlog of federal immigration cases and the ongoing legal fallout from the administration’s mass-deportation push, and the result is an organization that is thoroughly overwhelmed.”

In a rare ruling, in late February, Minnesota District Judge Paul A. Magnuson dismissed a felon-in-possession case under the Speedy Trial Act after prosecutors told the court that factors including a staffing shortage had prevented their office from meeting a deadline. The U.S. Attorney’s office has lost a significant number of experienced AUSAs who objected to the way DOJ was handling cases related to the immigration crackdown in the state.

The effect of all of this is becoming obvious. In New Jersey, the District Court forced the Acting U.S. Attorney to audit the government’s sorry record of compliance with court orders. In a filing last month, the government admitted to violating court orders 56 times in 574 immigration proceedings. The total included 18 missed deadlines and 10 failures to turn over evidence as ordered.

The presumption of regularity is a judicially created doctrine that grants the government an advantage not enjoyed by private litigants. The presumption directs courts, unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, that executive officials have “properly discharged their official duties” and that government agencies have acted with procedural regularity and with good-faith, non-pretextual reasons.

Courts and scholars are now wondering whether the government should continue to enjoy that presumption. The liberal website Just Security and the conservative Cato Institute have both questioned it in lengthy articles. The liberal blog Talking Points Memo said last month, “The pace of this important story is slow by dramatic standards, but by the somnambulant standards of the federal judiciary, the erosion of the credibility of the Justice Department, which took decades to establish and has all but vanished in one year under Trump II, is moving at lightning speed.”

Last month, District Judge Christine O’Hearn (District of New Jersey), wrote, “[T]he presumption of regularity and integrity previously and routinely afforded to the Executive branch and the United States Attorney’s Office has been undeniably eroded in this jurisdiction and across the country, and this Court will no longer blindly accept statements of fact from Respondents unless they are made under oath by an individual with personal knowledge…”

At the end of January, Minnesota Chief District Judge Patrick Schiltz issued an order that found that Immigration and Customs Enforcement had violated 96 court orders stemming from its crackdown in the state and had disobeyed more court orders in one month than “some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.”

When U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen emailed Judge Schiltz to complain that 96 violations was an exaggeration, Schiltz blasted back, warning Rosen that his office and ICE officials must comply with court orders or risk criminal contempt.

On March 5, the Minnesota Reformer reported that for a second time in a week, Rosen was ordered to appear before two different judges to explain why he should not be held in contempt for the government’s violations of court orders.

All of this is consequential for federal prisoners, who, on one hand, will experience more delay from more frequent government extensions but, on the other, may find government opposition to their motions less competently (and less honestly) done. To be sure, an inmate filer should be more vigorous in arguing that the government should receive no benefit from a presumption of good faith and regularity.

A final note on this incomplete listing of all of DOJ’s current travails: last week, a senior AUSA in the Eastern District of North Carolina was fired after filing a response in a civil action that included “fabricated quotations and misstatements of case holdings” and then made “false or misleading statements” about their origins, according to Bloomberg Law.

In a March 2 order, a District Court magistrate judge ordered the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina senior leadership into court to explain why the entire office shouldn’t be held jointly responsiblefor the undisclosed and incredibly sloppy use of artificial intelligence in a court filing.

The AUSA told the Court that he had used AI to “catch up” on a draft filing and that the errors were accidental. But the Magistrate Judge looked at prior filings by the same AUSA and found similar errors. “It’s difficult to credit your response given what you’ve done here,” the Judge said. No presumption of regularity here…

The New York Times, 220,000 Fewer Workers: How Trump’s Cuts Affected Every Federal Agency (January 9, 2026)

NBC News, Government attorney who told judge in ICE case, ‘This job sucks,’ removed from detail (February 4, 2026)

The Atlantic, The DOJ Isn’t Built for This (February 19, 2026)

The New York Times, Demanding Support for Trump, Justice Dept. Struggles to Recruit Prosecutors (February 11, 2026)

Just Security, The “Presumption of Regularity” in Trump Administration Litigation (November 20, 2025)

Cato Institute, Do the Feds Still Merit the Court’s Presumption of Regularity? (January 5, 2026)

Talking Points Memo, Judges Big Mad at Trump DOJ in Wave of New Rebukes (February 23, 2026)

Declaration, Doc 21-1, Kumar v Soto, Case No. 2:26-cv-777 (D. New Jersey, filed February 13, 2026)

Order, Doc 10, Singh v Tsoukaris, Case No 1:26-cv-1531(D. New Jersey, filed February 20, 2026) 

Order, Doc 10, Juan TR v. Noem, Case No 0-26-cv-107 (D. Minn., filed January 26, 2026)

Minnesota Reformer, US Attorney Daniel Rosen defends himself, again, in contempt hearing for ICE order violations (March 5, 2026)

ABA Journal, Federal prosecutor resigns after AI errors found in court filing (March 11, 2026)

~ Thomas L. Root

DOJ Publishes New Gun Rights Restoration Program Proposal – Update for July 22, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SPEAKING OF GUNS, AS WE ARE…

The Dept of Justice last Friday released the long-awaited proposed rules for convicted felons and other disqualified people to win restoration of their gun rights.

In March, the DOJ restored gun rights to a handful of people disqualified by 18 USC § 922(g), most famously actor and Trump supporter Mel Gibson, disqualified under 18 USC § 922(g)(9) for a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction over a decade ago. At the time, Attorney General Pam Bondi said the DOJ would be crafting a program for people covered by § 922(g) to apply for restoration of gun rights under its authority to do so granted by 18 USC § 925(c).

The DOJ’s 48-page notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) outlines the history of firearms rights restoration, the legal authority,  the policy rationale for such a program, the offenders the rule will exclude, and how applicants will be evaluated.

“For too long, countless Americans with criminal histories have been permanently disenfranchised from exercising the right to keep and bear arms—a right every bit as constitutionally enshrined as the right to vote, the right to free speech, and the right to free exercise of religion—irrespective of whether they actually pose a threat,” Bondi said in a press release. “No longer.”

The proposed rule holds that people who were fugitives from justice (§ 922(g)(2)), unlawful drug users (§ 922(g)(2)), people subject to domestic violence restraining orders (§ 922(g)(8)), and illegal immigrants (§ 922(g)(5)) would be “presumptively ineligible for relief and therefore denied relief absent extraordinary circumstances.” The proposed rule also lists individual violent felony offenses, sex crimes, and other crimes “closely associated with dangerousness,” such as threatening or stalking offenses, that would be grounds for presumptive denial.

The rule would provide that people with certain offenses, which are “less serious or indicative of violence,” can have their presumption of denial mitigated by the passage of time since the offense occurred. The proposal says that for some crimes, like drug-distribution or misdemeanor domestic violence, that “bear a more direct relationship to violence,” DOJ will consider applicants without a presumption of denial only after ten years have passed following completion of probation, parole, or supervised release period. All non-violent offenders would be required to wait five years after completing their punishment before DOJ will process their applications.

The rule states that the DOJ will reject a narrow “categorical approach” that examines only the disqualifying conviction. Instead, it will review the applicant’s history and characteristics, including his or her entire criminal history, non-charged conduct, known associations, and inquiries to local law enforcement.

The NPRM makes it fairly clear that a prime motivator for the rights restoration program is to give the Government an argument that deciding that courts need not decide the constitutionality of 18 USC § 922(g)(1) because an alternative gun rights restoration is in place: “As recognized by courts, a functional section 925(c) process would render much of this litigation unnecessary and ensure that individuals meeting the relevant criteria may possess firearms under federal law in a manner consistent with the Second Amendment, while still protecting public safety.”

Written comments are due October 20, 2025.

This is nothing more than an administrative band-aid. If someone like Melynda Vincent, whose 15-year-old bank fraud conviction should not have disqualified her from gun ownership under the Second Amendment, was never constitutionally stripped of her right to own a gun, then a government argument that she is entitled to jump through a protracted application hoop to win back Second Amendment rights she never lost is specious.

 

DOJ, Application for Relief from Disabilities Imposed by Federal Laws with Respect to the Acquisition, Receipt, Transfer, Shipment, Transportation, or Possession of Firearms (90 FR 34394, July 18, 2025)

DOJ, Justice Department Publishes Proposed Rule to Grant Relief to Certain Individuals Precluded from Possessing Firearms (July 18, 2025)

~ Thomas L. Root

Never a Dull Moment in D.C. – Update for March 27, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

WASHINGTON WEEK

Last week was a busy one in Washington (at least, according to a Signal chat group I was accidentally invited to join):

Gun rights: The Dept of Justice last week proposed a rule change that will clear the way for letting it set up an office to restore gun rights to people who have been convicted of nonviolent crimes.

guns200304The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives – an agency within the DOJ – has the authority to do so now, having been tasked with running the 18 USC § 925 program by the Secretary of the Treasury since 1965 passage of amendments to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938. At the time, ATF was an agency of the Dept of Treasury, and thus it was delegated authority of the Treasury Secretary to hand out gun forgiveness.

The Homeland Security Act transferred the enforcement side of ATF to DOJ in 2002, and substituted the Attorney General for former § 925’s designation of the Secretary of the Treasury.

Back in 1992, Congress could not generate the votes to kill the rights restoration program but Senator Charles Schumer (then a congressman) was able to slip a provision into the ATF’s budget that prohibited the agency from spending any of its budget to operate the program. So while the program remains on the books, no government employee (assuming any are left, Elon) is permitted to spend a second of official time processing applications.

Last week’s proposed rule will withdraw the “effectively moribund” Attorney General’s delegation of authority to the ATF to run the program, letting DOJ handle the rights restoration in house. Presto. ATF may not be able to spend any of its budget on the § 925 program, but nothing will stop DOJ from doing so (unless the Democrats in Congress are able to slide another budget prohibition into the budget).

DOJ said the proposed rule “reflects an appropriate avenue to restore firearm rights to certain individuals who no longer warrant such disability based on a combination of the nature of their past criminal activity and their subsequent and current law-abiding behavior.”

DOJ will take comments on the proposed rule until June 18, 2025.

President Floats Imprisoning Americans in El Salvador: After several incidents of vandalism against Tesla property, President Donald Trump said on Truth Social that such acts would be treated as “domestic terrorism” and the perps could be sent to prison in El Salvador.

“I look forward to watching the sick terrorist thugs get 20-year jail sentences for what they are doing to Elon Musk and Tesla,” Trump posted on Truth Social last Friday. “Perhaps they could serve them in the prisons of El Salvador, which have become so recently famous for such lovely conditions!”

President Suggests Some Biden Clemencies Are Void: President Trump announced that President Biden’s preemptive pardons of people who served on the January 6th committee are of “no further force or effect” in a social media post just after midnight on Monday.

autopen250327Trump alleged that Biden used an autopen on a number of official documents, including presidential clemencies. Autopens are machines designed to automatically replicate a handwritten signature and have been used for years by presidents to sign large volumes of documents.

Speaking to reporters onboard Air Force One a week ago, President Trump maintained the autopen signature made the clemencies void. However, he said “it’s not my decision” whether Biden’s pardons can be voided, and that it would ultimately be up to the courts.

The concern is that if even one Biden clemency can be voided by a later president, none of them is safe.

Fire the Judge: If I had a nickel for every time a prisoner has asked me how to get his or her judge taken off the case, I’d own my own Caribbean island by now.

Removing a judge is a hard thing to do, especially if the judge’s bias resulted from what she had read and heard in your own case. The U.S. Attorney will always fight removal, too, which is why the DOJ’s sudden push to remove federal judges for the sin of not being Donald Trump fans is so surprising.

Politico reports, “As tensions between the White House and the federal judiciary continue to rise, litigators at the Justice Department are increasingly seeking to have judges removed from cases where they have ruled against the administration.”

Last Friday, DOJ filed a motion to disqualify U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell (District of Columbia) from a lawsuit brought by big-law firm Perkins Coie challenging a Trump executive order that lawyers said was designed to destroy the firm in retaliation for work it had done on behalf of his political enemies. DOJ has accused her of “partiality against and animus toward” the President.

On Tuesday, Judge Howell entered a 21-page Memorandum Opinion and Order eviscerating the DOJ’s motion, noting that litigants’ right to a fair and impartial hearing “does not entitle any party—not even those with the power and prestige of the President of the United States or a federal agency—to demand adherence to their own version of the facts and preferred legal outcome.”

Earlier last week, a separate DOJ attorney asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, calling for U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to be removed from case regarding the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members. The letter took issue with what it called Boasberg’s “highly unusual and improper procedures.”

signal250327After Judge Boasberg was selected at random this week to hear a lawsuit against the Administration for the Signal chat debacle, President Trump went ballistic on his Truth Social account last night: “How disgraceful is it that ‘Judge’ James Boasberg has just been given a fourth ‘Trump Case,’ something which is, statistically, IMPOSSIBLE,” Trump wrote.

Newsweek said this morning that “Trump’s statements continue his long trend of claiming that the legal system is rigged against him, which he used as a platform throughout the 2024 presidential campaign.”

DOJ, Delegation of Authority, 90 FR 13080 (March 20, 2025)

The Hill, DOJ creating path for people with criminal convictions to again own guns (March 20, 2025)

Fortune, After the Justice Department charged three people with vandalizing Tesla property, the president floated sending the accused to prisons in El Salvador (March 21, 2025)

Politico, Trump floats sending Americans to foreign prisons. Civil rights groups say that would be illegal. (March 21, 2025)

Newsweek, Donald Trump Sends Warning To Enemies As He Says Biden Pardons Void (March 17, 2025)

Politico, DOJ moves to boot federal judge from Perkins Coie case (March 21, 2025)

New York Times, Judge Assails White House Efforts to Kick Her Off Perkins Coie Case (March 26, 2025)

Newsweek, Donald Trump Rages at Judge Boasberg Getting Signal Case: ‘Disgraceful’ (March 27, 2025)

– Thomas L. Root

Pardon Attorney Becomes Gun Victim – Update for March 11, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

GOODBYE, LIZ… WE HARDLY KNEW YE

oyer250311Notoriously apolitical and dedicated Dept of Justice Pardon Attorney Elizabeth G. Oyer was abruptly fired and frog-marched out of the DOJ building by security last Friday morning. Her crime?  According to this morning’s New York Times, Oyer refused to recommend restoration of gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, who is disqualified from possessing a lethal weapon due to a 2011 misdemeanor conviction for battering his girlfriend.

Under 18 USC § 922(g)(8), a conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence disqualifies a person from possessing a firearm or ammunition that has traveled in interstate commerce. While it is possible for a person disqualified under § 922(g) – which lists multiple categories of people not allowed to have guns – to possess a firearm that was manufactured in the same state in which the person lives, the courts have long held that no commercial ammunition is made entirely of components produced in a single state.

In 2011, Gibson pleaded no contest in Los Angeles Superior Court to a charge of misdemeanor battery stemming from a January 2010 fight he had with Oksana Grigorieva, his ex-girlfriend and the mother of his then 1-year-old daughter. Gibson was sentenced to 36 months of informal probation, community service, a year of domestic violence counseling, and $570 in fines. In an incident which must have had a fascinating backstory, prosecutors also agreed not to charge Grigorieva with extortion, citing insufficient evidence. Gibson had alleged that she tried to extort money from by leaking multiple recordings of him purportedly yelling at her.

Oyer said through a spokesperson yesterday that about two weeks ago, she was assigned to a working group to restore gun rights to people convicted of crimes. The group was headed by Paul Perkins of the deputy attorney general’s office and James McHenry, the acting attorney general, two sources familiar with the effort told NBC.

As The New York Times described it, “It was an unusual assignment for the office of the pardon attorney, which typically handles requests for clemency and tries to focus on people who cannot hire well-connected lawyers to plead their cases to the White House, where the president has vast power to grant pardons in federal cases. Mr. Trump has a history of making pardon decisions without substantial input from the pardon attorney, but in this case Justice Department leaders planned to make the decision about gun rights on their own.”

gibsongun250311NBC News reported today that the working group was “instructed to find a way to restore gun rights to entire classes of previously convicted people. Because ATF is technically prohibited from processing such requests, the plan was to give the authority to the pardon attorney and for there to be a semi-automated process. That was in stark contrast to how the pardon office normally works, which is by evaluating each application case by case and making recommendations.”

A list of about 95 people made the initial list, but that was cut to about nine. Oyer prepared a draft memorandum for the group, but after she submitted the draft, she was asked to add Gibson’s name to the list and was given a letter that Gibson’s attorney had sent asking DOJ to restore his gun rights.

She refused to do so, explaining that she lacked enough information about the 2011 conviction to make a recommendation. However, she soon got a phone call from the deputy attorney general’s office asking whether her position on Gibson was flexible. When she said it was not, NBC said, Oyer was told that “Mel Gibson is a friend of the president and that should be justification enough.”

On Friday morning, NBC said, Oyer submitted a second draft memo that summarized the information she had available on Gibson – including not just the 2011 conviction but also reports of Gibson’s 2006 drunken anti-semitic tirade to LA cops – and made no any recommendation to the attorney general

Shortly after that, she was handed her termination notice and marched out.

Oyerfiring250311“This is dangerous. This isn’t political — this is a safety issue,” Oyer told The New York Times. In a statement to NBC, Oyer described a climate of fear within the DOJ. “Unfortunately, experienced professionals throughout the Department are afraid to voice their opinions because dissent is being punished,” she was quoted as saying. “Decisions are being made based on relationships and loyalty, not based on facts or expertise or sound analysis, which is very alarming given that what is at stake is our public safety.”

The Times said that Oyer’s account of the gun debate over Gibson and others was confirmed by two other people familiar with the events, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation.

A Justice Department official familiar with the matter told NBC News and The Times that Oyer’s firing was not related to the Gibson case. “The Mel Gibson decision did not play a role in termination decision,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The paperwork was done before the Mel Gibson email went out.”

However, NBC reported that a second senior Justice Department official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said Oyer’s ouster “is part of a very concerning set of personnel moves across the federal government and at DOJ” in which officials who might act as checks on abuses of power were being fired.

“I don’t know how much of what happened to Liz was a failure to toe the line about a specific thing,” the DOJ official is quoted as saying. “But, systematically, the political leadership of this administration is doing their best to take away the institutional guardrails.”

Oyer was appointed by President Joe Biden. She was a breath of fresh air in the Pardon Office backwater, spearheading sessions at federal prisons where she spoke to inmates about the pardon process and dismissing a stack of very old and stale clemency petitions to try to reset the process. All too often, both Biden and (in the last six weeks) Trump appeared on more than one occasion to ignore her role in the pardon process when it suited them.

As for the gun rights restoration push, NBC reported that while a system has not yet been set up to review gun rights restoration applications, “there have been talks to have the attorney general immediately begin restoring rights to a pre-set list of people in the meantime, two law enforcement officials familiar with the matter said.”

New York Times, Justice Dept. Official Says She Was Fired After Opposing Restoring Mel Gibson’s Gun Rights (March 11, 2025)

NBC News, DOJ official says she was fired after opposing the restoration of Mel Gibson’s gun rights (March 11, 2025)

– Thomas L. Root

A No-BS Zone About The President and The BOP – Update for February 20, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

GIVE ‘EM HELL, HARRY

Legend has it that President Harry Truman was giving a speech when an enthusiastic supporter shouted, “Give ‘em hell, Harry!” The President replied, “I don’t give them hell. I just tell the truth about them, and they think it’s hell.”

I got an email from a reader who said, “We appreciate your work on the news letters. but a LOT!!! of us are Trump fans. We don’t want to listen (read) liberal bs about our president.”

noBS190509No BS, no hell, just the facts:

President Trump’s new attorney general, Pam Bondi, issued as memo her first day in office outlining general policy regarding charging, plea negotiations, and sentencing for prosecutors. She directs that in federal criminal cases, prosecutors “should charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense. The most serious offenses are those punishable by death, or those with the most significant mandatory minimum sentences (including under the Armed Career Criminal Act and 21 USC § 851) and the most substantial recommendation under the Sentencing Guidelines.”

Last Friday, Bondi reversed a Biden administration decision, ordering the transfer of George Hanson, a federal inmate to Oklahoma so he can be executed, following through on Trump’s executive order to more actively support the death penalty.

death200623Bondi directed the Bureau of Prisons to transfer an inmate serving a life sentence at USP Pollock who is also under a state death sentence for a different crime. Oklahoma asked for the transfer several years ago, but the Biden Administration refused. Oklahoma wants the transfer to be done quickly so that it can kill him in its May execution cycle.

ABC reported on Friday that it obtained a memorandum of understanding between the BOP and Immigration and Customs Enforcement that despite chronic staffing shortages to manage its existing population, the Bureau will house ICE detainees at FDCs in Philadelphia, and at Atlanta, Leavenworth and Berlin FCIs.

KQED reported last Friday that ICE officials and BOP national and regional staff inspected FCI Dublin – a women’s prison that closed last April due to a staff-on-inmate sexual abuse scandal – to determine its availability to hold immigrant detainees.

privateprisons180131“With the contract that ICE and BOP have entered into and the needed bed space…and then their assessments — them coming to the facility and doing these assessments — my opinion would be the indication is absolutely there that this is potentially going to be converted to an ICE facility,” said John Kostelnik, western regional vice president for the AFGE Council of Prison Locals No. 33. “There’s a lot of unofficial notice from agency officials and others that are telling us that this is what is happening.”

I received reports from several people last week that the BOP has returned all non-citizens in halfway house or on home confinement pursuant to FSA credits to secure custody. The reports came from several different parts of the country and appear reliable, but they are not officially confirmed.

In a press release and earnings call last week, CoreCivic’s CEO told investors that the company – which has contracts to detain people for ICE in its private prisons, expects a massive increase in the number of people it will be holding. The company also expects growth from BOP contracts. Trump has allowed the BOP to again contract with private prison operators after Biden canceled BOP private prison contracts in 2021.

Finally, the BOP issued a press release confirming that because of Trump’s January 20 Executive Order directing agencies to remove content related to gender ideology from their publications — “some content on our public website (www.bop.gov) is temporarily unavailable as we work to fully implement the Executive Order.” For the last four weeks, the BOP’s extensive online library of program statements has been unavailable.

Attorney General, General Policy Regarding Charging, Plea Negotiations, and Sentencing (February 5, 2025)

Associated Press, Bondi orders federal inmate transferred to Oklahoma for execution (February 14, 2025)

ABC News, Males detained by ICE to be housed in federal prisons, new memo says (February 14, 2025)

BOP, Agency Complies with Executive Order (February 11, 2025)

KQED, ICE Weighs Turning FCI Dublin Into Detention Center, Union Leaders Say (February 14, 2025)

Arizona Republic, Private prison company CoreCivic anticipates ‘growth opportunities’ under Donald Trump (February 11, 2025)

– Thomas L. Root