Federal Judges Rebuke Justice Department Lawyers Over False Claims in 3 Recent Cases
Updated
Updated · The New York Times · Jun 1
Federal Judges Rebuke Justice Department Lawyers Over False Claims in 3 Recent Cases
3 articles · Updated · The New York Times · Jun 1
May 14 rulings and other recent orders show federal judges sharply criticizing Justice Department lawyers for withholding information and making claims contradicted by the record.
In Rhode Island, Judge Mary McElroy said government lawyers falsely claimed a hospital had stopped responding over gender-transition treatment records, while emails showed the hospital’s lawyers remained in close contact.
McElroy called the government’s account “misleading, if not utterly false” and wrote the department had proven “unworthy” of the trust courts place in government lawyers.
The criticism extends beyond that case: a Chicago judge said grand jury transcripts were redacted to conceal misconduct, and another Rhode Island judge referred an assistant U.S. attorney for possible discipline after he admitted withholding information.
The rebukes come as administration lawyers defend major parts of President Trump’s agenda, raising broader questions about the Justice Department’s credibility in court.
With judges citing 'dishonest conduct,' what reforms can restore trust in the federal justice system?
Who should discipline federal lawyers for misconduct: their DOJ bosses or independent state bars?