DOJ Asks DOJ Tax Attorneys to Join the Team(s) Necessary to Defend Trump's and Musk's Rampage Through Government (2/27/25; 2/28/25)

Bloomberg’s Tax Report has an article titled DOJ Seeks Rapid Lawyer Transfers to Defend Trump Agenda in Court, here. The article is behind a paywall so that nonsubscribers will not be able to access. I will summarize the parts related to the Tax Division.

The powers that be in DOJ are asking DOJ Tax and DOJ Civil Rights attorneys to transfer to the civil litigation sections (“federal programs, appellate, and immigration litigation”) handling the flurry of suits against the Trump/Musk actions.

I cannot imagine anyone in their right mind, other than a Trump true believer, moving from DOJ Tax to that section. The exception might be those DOJ Tax attorneys at risk of some RIF of Tax attorneys where less competent DOJ Tax attorneys might be weeded out.

The article also suggests that in recruiting attorneys for the flurry of litigation, DOJ indicated a willingness to consider “external attorneys.” Reading between the lines, I think they are saying that attorneys that the DOJ Components would have otherwise not accepted might be able to join the litigation teams to deal with this flurry of lawsuits.  In short, the less competent who must be willing to grovel to Trump and his DOJ Team. Those “new hire” attorneys would seem to be in a probationary period subject to at will firing. So, they would have to be willing to take the risk and mitigate the risk by sucking up to the Trump loyalists.

Added 2/28 12:15pm:

Recent DOJ Alumni Statement Condemning on the Flynn Case (2/18/20)

I previously posted the following:  DOJ Alumni Statement Condemning AG Barr (DOJ Tax Alumni Blog 2/18/20), here.  In that post, I advised about an informal DOJ Alumni group, with considerable mass (i.e., alumni participants) who were making a statement of dissatisfaction with Attorney General Barr.  In that notice, I provided it only for the information of DOJ Tax Alumni that might be interested and otherwise did not know about the initiative.  I did not recommend it to anyone.

In the same vein, I offer this new statement by the DOJ Alumni Group.  DOJ Alumni Statement on Flynn Case (Medium 5/11/20), here.

The group says that it will continue to update the list of those supporting the statement here for those who may not have considered it yet.

Again, I am not endorsing the statement for others.  I did join the list, but that is not a recommendation for others to do so.

DOJ Alumni Statement Condemning AG Barr (2/18/20)

Most DOJ Tax Alumni have by now read that there is a statement joined by former DOJ attorneys condemning Attorney General Barr’s conduct in office that seems to have injected political factors into leadership beyond what has become the norm to insulate DOJ from politics.  That statement is here.

When the original announcement hit the newspapers a few days ago, the number was more than 1,000 DOJ Alumni.  I understand that now the number is around 2,000 or more.  The list as updated from time to time may be viewed at the bottom of the statement linked above.  (Added 2/19/20: the count is 2,460 per an email I received on 2/18/20.)

Some DOJ Tax Alumni may not yet be aware of the statement or may be aware only  through news summaries.  And some who may agree with the statement may wish to make their voices heard by joining the statement.  I am not aware of a forum for DOJ Alumni to express their approval of Attorney General Barr or disagreement with the statement.  (Of course anyone reading this blog can do so by commenting on the blog, but remember that readership of this blog is low; if anyone knows of a similar list of DOJ Alumni taking different positions than the statement, please let me know and I will consider posting it as well.)

So I provide a link here for those wishing to join the statement to do so.  (The link is also at the bottom of the statement linked above.)

I am not advocating that any other DOJ Tax Alumni (or any, more broadly, DOJ alumni) reading this blog entry join the statement.  I did join it but that not should not be read as encouragement for anyone else to join.