At Senate Hearing, Lawmakers Challenge Justice Department on Independence, Court Compliance and Grant Cuts-domchua69

At Senate Hearing, Lawmakers Challenge Justice Department on Independence, Court Compliance and Grant Cuts

WASHINGTON — A Senate appropriations hearing on Wednesday exposed deep tensions between congressional oversight officials and the Department of Justice, as Attorney General Pam Bondi faced pointed questions about the department’s independence, its adherence to court orders, and a series of abrupt grant cancellations that officials across the country say have disrupted key public safety programs.

The exchange, led by Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, highlighted what lawmakers described as a series of troubling administrative shifts: consolidating long-standing divisions, eliminating specialized offices, delaying or terminating hundreds of grants, and declining to comply promptly with judicial directives. While Ms. Bondi rejected suggestions that the department was acting improperly, she acknowledged she was unaware of some of the specific programs affected by budget decisions and defended broad structural changes as necessary for efficiency.

“We are in a deeply alarming moment where law and order is being replaced by chaos and corruption,” Ms. Murray said, opening her remarks. She cited reports of career officials being dismissed, detainees — including American citizens — being transported overseas without due process, and elected officials being detained or confronted during routine oversight activities. “This is not the country I know or the values I believe in,” she said.

Ms. Bondi rejected those characterizations. “We will follow court orders,” she said, adding that disputes arising in lower federal courts often create “constraints” that the administration believes will ultimately be resolved by the Supreme Court. Pressed repeatedly on whether she would prevent Justice Department officials from defying such orders, she declined to address specific allegations, saying they involved matters under active litigation. “I’m not going to talk about anything that’s alleged,” she said. “What I will say is that I will always support and defend my deputies.”

The immediate backdrop for the hearing was a whistleblower complaint filed by a former Justice Department attorney. The complaint accuses Deputy Attorney General Amal Boove and senior officials of “deliberate delay” and “lack of candor” in complying with judicial directives, and alleges the attorney was terminated for communicating concerns to the court. Administration officials have dismissed the complaint as “suspicious” in its timing, noting it was filed on the eve of Ms. Boove’s scheduled public testimony.

Still, several senators expressed concern about what they described as an emerging pattern. “These allegations are deeply concerning,” Ms. Murray said, emphasizing that adherence to court orders is “a fundamental expectation of any administration regardless of party.”

Beyond questions of judicial compliance, the hearing focused extensively on the department’s funding decisions. In April, the Justice Department terminated more than 300 public safety grants that had already completed the department’s competitive, months-long review process. The grants supported local law enforcement investigations, foster care programs for vulnerable children, forensic exam accessibility for sexual assault survivors, and a range of community-based violence prevention initiatives.

“These cancellations have already forced organizations nationwide to cut employees and services,” Ms. Murray said, asking whether Ms. Bondi was aware that certain discontinued grants funded sexual assault investigations and the prosecution of rape cases.

“I have no idea about that specific grant you’re talking about,” Ms. Bondi replied. She insisted the department had cut only about 6 percent of grant funding and said she would personally review any programs that senators believed were wrongly eliminated. “We’ve turned multiple grants back on,” she said. “If you want to come sit down with me, I’d be happy to look at it.”

The structure of the department itself also emerged as a point of contention. The administration’s budget proposal seeks to consolidate the Office on Violence Against Women — established by Congress in 2002 as a standalone, independent office — into the Office of Justice Programs. Lawmakers say the change would undermine the office’s specialized mission and violate statutory intent.

“Will you commit to maintaining OVW as a separate grant entity?” Ms. Murray asked.

“I will follow the law, but I will not keep that as a separate grant entity,” Ms. Bondi responded. “We can disagree on what the law is.”

Ms. Murray reminded her that the office’s independence was explicitly codified. “You need to go back and take a look at that,” she said.

The attorney general maintained that consolidating the office would not diminish support for victims of domestic or sexual violence, saying she would not “cut anything that’s going to hurt violence against women.” But she did not address concerns that reducing the office’s autonomy could dilute its ability to advocate internally for dedicated resources.

The hearing underscored a broader struggle over institutional norms at a moment when federal agencies face heightened scrutiny and political pressure. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed concern that the Justice Department’s longstanding guardrails — designed to shield investigations and legal decisions from political influence — are being tested.

For Ms. Murray, the exchange served as part of a broader argument that the erosion of institutional independence often occurs incrementally, through administrative restructuring, budget shifts, and what she described as selective compliance with legal obligations.

“When these systems weaken, the consequences do not appear all at once,” she said after the hearing. “But over time, the public loses the protections those institutions were built to provide.”

As the Justice Department continues to implement its restructuring and respond to litigation involving its recent decisions, lawmakers indicated they plan to pursue additional oversight hearings in the coming months.

Related Posts

🔥 Carney Slams Trump’s “Governor” Jab, Reasserts USMCA Reality and Canada’s Sovereignty.trang

Canadian political heavyweight Mark Carney has forcefully pushed back against former U.S. President Donald Trump’s controversial “governor” remark aimed at Canada, igniting fresh debate over sovereignty, trade,…

BREAKING: Mark Carney SHOCKS The World by Threatening Donald Trump!.konkon

Mark Carney Delivers Fiery Rebuke at Davos, Warning of Global ‘Rupture’ in Clash With Trump Over Tariffs and Greenland DAVOS, Switzerland — In a speech that reverberated…

💥 SHOCKING CONFLICT: CANADA COUNTER-ATTACKS TRUMP’S PORT DEMAND — A POWERFUL MOVE THAT BACKFOLDS as US WEAKNESS IS UNEXPECTEDLY EXPOSED and TENSIONS EXPLODE …tannhan

Water Becomes the New Front Line in the Canada–U.S. Trade War From Tariffs to Water: A Strategic Escalation The trade war between Canada and the United States…

🚨 JUST IN: TRUMP’S CANADA TARIFF THREATS NEVER HAPPEN — MARK CARNEY QUIETLY DESTROYS THE STRATEGY 🇺🇸🇨🇦 … tannhan

Canada Has Decoded Trump’s Tariff Bluff — and Is Quietly Winning the Trade War Trump Threatens. Canada Watches. The Threats Collapse. Wall Street noticed it first and…

🚨 TRUMP’S THREATS BACKFIRE: $19 BILLION CANADIAN F-35 DEAL ANNIHILATED — CANADA PIVOTS TO SWEDEN! .susu

In a stunning economic meltdown that has rocked international alliances, former President Donald Trump’s aggressive rhetoric has suddenly imploded a colossal $19 billion defense contract overnight, without…

🚨 BREAKING: EUROPE SENDS A CHILLING MESSAGE TO CANADA — “WE CAN’T TRUST AMERICA ANYMORE.”… tannhan

Europe and Canada Prepare for a Post-America NATO as Trump Threatens Allied Sovereignty A NATO Taboo Is Broken What happens when the most powerful ally in an…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *