Mass Exodus of Over 100 Attorneys from DOJ’s Civil Rights Division

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws, is experiencing a significant exodus of legal talent, with over 100 attorneys reportedly departing in recent weeks, according to Harmeet K. Dhillon, the newly confirmed Assistant Attorney General leading the division. The mass resignations come as the division undergoes a dramatic reorientation under the Trump administration, raising concerns among civil rights advocates and Democratic lawmakers about the future of its mission.

Dhillon, a conservative attorney and longtime Republican activist, confirmed the departures in an interview with conservative commentator Glenn Beck on Saturday, April 26, 2025. She described the resignations as a positive development, stating, “Over 100 attorneys decided that they’d rather not do what their job requires them to do, and I think that’s fine.” Dhillon emphasized that the division’s focus should be on enforcing federal civil rights laws, not “woke ideology,” and criticized outgoing staff for pursuing what she called “pet projects” targeting police departments and individuals praying outside abortion facilities.

The exodus, which some sources estimate could see up to 70% of the division’s staff depart, is tied to a second White House offer allowing federal employees to resign with severance pay through September 2025. The deadline for this offer passed on Monday, April 28, 2025, prompting a surge in resignations. According to a source familiar with the situation, the final number of departures may exceed 200 attorneys, significantly depleting the division’s ranks.

Under Dhillon’s leadership and with Attorney General Pam Bondi’s oversight, the Civil Rights Division is shifting its priorities away from traditional roles—such as protecting voting rights, addressing police misconduct, and fighting housing discrimination—toward issues aligned with President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign platform. These include dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, investigating antisemitism on college campuses, challenging transgender rights policies, and protecting “women’s sports” by restricting transgender athletes’ participation. The division has also paused investigations into alleged police abuse and launched a probe into whether Los Angeles violated gun rights laws, signaling a stark departure from its historical focus on marginalized communities.

Critics argue that these changes undermine the division’s core mission, established in 1957 to protect the rights of Black Americans and later expanded to address discrimination based on race, sex, disability, and gender identity. Vanita Gupta, who led the division under President Barack Obama, told The New York Times, “This is not simply a change in enforcement priorities — the division has been turned on its head and is now being used as a weapon against the very communities it was established to protect.” Gupta described the exodus as “unprecedented and understandable,” given the administration’s redirection of the division’s resources.

Democratic senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee have expressed alarm over the changes, writing a letter on April 25, 2025, to Dhillon, Bondi, and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. The senators questioned the reassignment of about a dozen senior career attorneys, including those overseeing police brutality, voting rights, and disability rights cases, to roles outside their expertise. “The division relies on the abilities and knowledge of its career staff to carry out the great responsibility of enforcing the nation’s civil rights laws without regard to politics,” the letter stated, highlighting fears that the reassignments and departures could erode institutional expertise.

The resignations have also sparked concern among legal scholars and former DOJ officials. Matthew B. Ross, a Northeastern University professor and expert witness in police reform cases, called the departures a “mass exodus” with “far-reaching consequences,” particularly for efforts to modernize law enforcement. Justin Levitt, a former senior official in the division, criticized the directive to dismiss all active voter discrimination cases, stating, “An instruction to drop a case without an explanation of why is just a decision to refuse to enforce the law.”

Dhillon, however, remains unfazed, framing the turnover as an opportunity to rebuild the division with attorneys aligned with the administration’s goals. In her interview with Beck, she said, “What we now need to do once all the dust settles and people are off the books is we are looking at resumes of lawyers who want to do that work. I don’t care what their politics are, it is not relevant.” She stressed that new hires must be willing to “zealously enforce the civil rights of the United States according to the priorities of this president.”

The mass exodus has drawn mixed reactions on social media platforms like X, where some users praised the departures as a necessary “cleaning house” to refocus the division, while others decried the loss of experienced attorneys as a blow to civil rights protections.

As the Civil Rights Division navigates this turbulent transition, its future role in safeguarding constitutional protections remains uncertain. With a significantly reduced staff and a redefined mission, the division faces challenges in maintaining its legacy as a defender of marginalized communities while adapting to the Trump administration’s priorities.

Sources: The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, Reuters, ABC News, The Guardian

17GEN4.com