WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Nearly two-thirds of the attorneys in the Justice Department’s Federal Programs Branch, the unit responsible for defending high-profile Trump administration policies, have resigned or announced plans to leave since President Donald Trump’s re-election, according to a staff list reviewed by Reuters.
The departures—69 out of roughly 110 lawyers—represent an exodus that sources describe as unprecedented. The list, compiled by former DOJ attorneys, was independently verified by Reuters through court records and LinkedIn profiles, with only four names unconfirmed.
While some attrition is expected during administration changes, seven current and former officials familiar with the unit described the scale and pace of departures as highly abnormal, driven by what they called a crushing workload and ethical unease over defending controversial policies.
“Many came to the Federal Programs Branch to uphold the Constitution,” said one lawyer who left during Trump’s second term. “How could they participate in tearing it down?”
Unit Under Strain Defending Polarizing Policies
The Federal Programs Branch defends challenges to federal policies in trial courts. Under Trump, that has included legal battles over his birthright citizenship order, the attempted defunding of Harvard University, and measures enacted by the Department of Government Efficiency, formerly led by Elon Musk.
Trump’s approach to executive power—often aggressive and legally contentious—has drawn sharp criticism. His administration has been accused of undermining federal agencies and retaliating against critics. While the White House defends its actions as lawful and within presidential authority, the Justice Department has faced an “unprecedented” wave of lawsuits, according to a DOJ spokesperson.
Still, the strain on career attorneys has been severe. Four former lawyers and three other people familiar with the unit told Reuters that many feared being asked to misrepresent facts or legal interpretations in court—a violation of professional ethics that could lead to sanctions.
“They were being pushed into uncomfortable territory,” one former official said. “Some policies didn’t seem legally defensible.”
Pressure and Political Interference
The situation intensified after Attorney General Pam Bondi warned DOJ attorneys in February they could face disciplinary action if they didn’t vigorously defend Trump’s agenda. Her memo stated career lawyers must not “substitute personal political views or judgments for those that prevailed in the election.”
Some viewed this as a veiled threat.
A separate incident added to those concerns: the firing of Erez Reuveni, a former supervisor in the Office of Immigration Litigation. Reuveni filed a whistleblower complaint alleging pressure to make unsupported arguments and misinterpret court rulings in immigration cases.
DOJ officials dismissed his claims and labeled him disgruntled. But the episode reportedly sent a chilling message across divisions.
Loss of Experience, Influx of Loyalists
The wave of resignations included at least 10 of 23 supervisors, many with experience spanning multiple administrations. In response, DOJ has brought in over a dozen attorneys from other divisions and 15 political appointees, many of whom have backgrounds in conservative legal advocacy.
“They’re more comfortable pressing legal boundaries,” said one former DOJ lawyer.
Despite a federal hiring freeze, the Federal Programs Branch has been granted exemptions to quickly backfill critical vacancies.
“We’ve never seen an administration test legal limits across such a wide range of policies so fast,” said Peter Keisler, former head of the DOJ’s Civil Division under President George W. Bush. “And now, they have fewer lawyers to defend those efforts.”
Key Legal Fights Ahead
The branch remains central to the administration’s legal defense strategy. Its lawyers are now preparing to push back against efforts to form nationwide class actions challenging Trump’s birthright citizenship order. One such request was granted by a judge last week.
Trump’s legal team is also expected to capitalize on a recent Supreme Court ruling limiting the ability of judges to block federal policies nationwide—potentially opening the door for more aggressive executive action with fewer judicial obstacles.
Ethical Crossroads for Government Attorneys
While some DOJ staffers departed over policy differences, others told Reuters they stayed through the first Trump term out of a belief in defending government actions regardless of who is in power.
But the second term, they said, crossed a line.
“Often, we were walking into court blind,” one said, describing poor communication from the White House and agencies about the policies being challenged.
Four former lawyers confirmed internal fears of being forced into arguments that violated ethics rules or facing termination for refusal.
A controversial set of executive orders targeting law firms further heightened tensions. DOJ attorneys assigned to defend the measures—seen by many as retaliatory and unconstitutional—struggled with the assignment. All four orders were eventually struck down by the courts.
Looking Ahead
The Federal Programs Branch, once a relatively stable unit, is now undergoing rapid transformation. Its shifting staff, elevated political pressure, and continued legal battles raise serious questions about the ability of government lawyers to operate independently—and ethically—under Trump’s leadership.
The Justice Department has offered no public comment on morale, ethics concerns, or internal staffing challenges.
