House Democrats condemn Trump's inspectors general firings in letter

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: The Hill

01/25/25 7:14 PM ET


A coalition of Democratic lawmakers expressed their concerns with President Trump’s Friday decision to fire independent inspectors general.

“We write to express our grave concern about your recent attempt to unlawfully and arbitrarily remove more than a dozen independent, nonpartisan inspectors general without notice to Congress or the public and in the dead of night,” Democrats wrote in a Saturday letter to the president. “Your actions violate the law, attack our democracy, and undermine the safety of the American people,” they added, likely referencing federal law that requires the president give Congress a 30-day notice of his intent to fire inspectors.

Those who signed on to the letter include Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) among others after multiple watchdogs at various agencies within the Pentagon, State Department and Transportation Department said they were notified of the termination over email Friday night.

Congress members said Trump’s decision was “unethical” and of detriment to the American people. “Firing inspectors general without due cause is antithetical to good government, undermines the proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and degrades the federal government’s ability to function effectively and efficiently,” Democrats wrote. “We urge you to withdraw your unlawful action and comply with your obligations to the American people.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5107000-house-democrats-condemn-trumps-inspectors-general-firings-in-letter/

---

Link to LETTER (PDF) - https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-oversight.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2025-01-25.%20Dem%20Committee%20RMs%20to%20Trump%20re.%20IG%20Firings.pdf

(I know DU will whine about "another strongly worded letter" but these are done because they are then entered into the official Congressional Record for historical purposes.)

[speak easy]

1. This is a criminal Administration breaking the law.

[Justice matters.]

8. SHALL be quickly followed by Articles of Impeachment...

The convicted felon BROKE THE LAW AGAIN after only 5 days...

SHALL but will not... Letters, letters, letters...

[speak easy]

9. 'criminal administration' 'criminal administration'

It will not be long until they start flouting court orders.

[doc03]

2. Strongly worded letter with lots of exclamation points I bet. nt

[BumRushDaShow]

3. They might be able to use that

for a 3rd Impeachment attempt... one day.

[Yavin4]

4. Susan Collins probably loaned them her template. n/t

[FormerOstrich]

5. Let me help them...

“We write to express our grave concern outrage about your recent attempt to unlawfully and arbitrarily remove more than a dozen independent, nonpartisan inspectors general without notice to Congress or the public and in the dead of night,” Democrats wrote in a Saturday letter to the president. “Your actions violate the law, attack our democracy, and undermine the safety of the American people,” they added, likely referencing federal law that requires the president give Congress a 30-day notice of his intent to fire inspectors. illegal and violate the oath of your office.

.......

Congress members said Trump’s decision was “unethical” illegal and of detriment to the American people. “Firing inspectors general without due cause is antithetical to good government, undermines the proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and degrades the federal government’s ability to function effectively and efficiently,” Democrats wrote. “We urge demand you to withdraw your unlawful action and comply with your obligations to the American people.”

[riversedge]

10. I do not know if Congress members can sue a President? ....

of course I hope and wish they could.

[mpcamb]

6. Save the strongly worded letters! Take him to court! It's illegal firing!

[prodigitalson]

7. I bet he's scared now

[LetMyPeopleVote]

11. Why Trump's personnel purges are likely to end up in court

There are legal constraints in place that are designed to prevent many of the president's recent firings. So why is Trump making the moves anyway?

Why Trump’s personnel purges are likely to end up in court www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...

— Rick Cooley (@rcooley123.bsky.social) 2025-01-30T21:42:23.901Z

Link to tweet

Why Trump’s personnel purges are likely to end up in court

Late last week, Donald Trump fired as many as 17 inspectors general without cause. These government watchdogs are responsible for investigating internal wrongdoing, possible ethical…”

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-personnel-purges-are-likely-end-court-rcna189850

The so-called “midnight massacre” was controversial for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that Trump’s move appears to be at odds with federal law. The New York Times report explained, “The firings defied a law that requires presidents to give Congress 30 days’ advance notice before removing any inspector general, along with reasons for the firing. Just two years ago, Congress strengthened that provision by requiring the notice to include a ‘substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons” for the removal.’”

Trump evidently didn’t care about the legal constraints....

As the week progressed, the list of firings grew. The Washington Post reported on the president firing “Democratic members of two independent federal commissions,” which represented “an extraordinary break from decades of legal precedent.”

On Monday night, he dismissed two of the three Democrats on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — Jocelyn Samuels and Charlotte Burrows, formerly the chair, the White House confirmed Tuesday. He also fired the chair of the National Labor Relations Board, Gwynne Wilcox, a Democrat, an NLRB spokesperson confirmed Tuesday. Trump also removed the EEOC’s general counsel, Karla Gilbride, who oversaw civil actions against employers on a range of issues, including discrimination claims from LGBTQ+ and pregnant workers. And he terminated Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB’s general counsel.

It might be tempting to think a new administration is going to make all kinds of personnel changes, so no one should be too surprised by widespread firings.....

There’s also a larger concern about whether the White House wants to do away with the very idea of independent commissions and boards, centralizing even more power and authority in the Oval Office.

But I'm also struck by the through-line: There are legal constraints in place that are designed to prevent many of these firings. The question is why the president appears indifferent to these limits

There will be litigation due to these firings