Project 2025 on the Department of Justice (DoJ)

People Magazine in its website article by Kylor Alvord dated July 11, 2024 states that:

“Project 2025 suggests that Trump take partisan control of the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation to oversee a “top-to-bottom overhaul.”

The DOJ is traditionally insulated from the White House, and while attorney general appointees are likely to share a number of the president’s views, they are expected to act in the best interest of the U.S. government as a whole. A section of the Project 2025 mandate authored by a former Trump official calls for increased communication between the White House and DOJ, because “litigation decisions must be made consistent with the President’s agenda.” (Ref. 1)

Project 2025 says that the FBI is currently ineffective and should be refocused to increase federal law enforcement presence in select areas of the U.S. where the administration believes laws aren’t being enforced strictly enough. It advises that the administration sue local government officials who don’t prosecute crimes to the administration’s liking.

The mandate adds that the Trump administration should immediately review all ongoing federal investigations and terminate the ones that the president doesn’t approve of, including those related to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. And it encourages Trump to work with Congress on ending the FBI director’s 10-year term limit, so that the president can replace them at will if they refuse to serve the president’s agenda.

Trump has already used veiled “retribution” language on the campaign trail that implied he would consider using the Justice Department to retaliate against his political rivals.”

 

References:

  1. People Magazine article “What is Project 2025? Inside The Far-Right Plan Threatening Everything From the Word ‘Gender’ to Public Eduction” by Kyler Alvord, July 11, 2024.

https://people.com/what-is-project-2025-inside-far-right-plan-trump-presidency-8622964

 

Read more below

 

Project 2025 Statements on the Department of Justice (DoJ)

 

“Unfortunately, the department has lost its way in recent years and has forfeited the trust of large segments of the American people. Large swaths of the department have been captured by an unaccountable bureaucratic managerial class and radical Left ideologues who have embedded themselves throughout its offices and components. The department also suffers from institutional inattentiveness to its core functions. Instead of being perceived as possessing the utmost impartiality and fairness as it advances the national interest on behalf of the American people— fighting crime and defending the rule of law—the DOJ has become a department that 46.6 percent of Americans recently indicated is, in their view, “too political, corrupt, and not to be trusted.” (Ref. 1, page 545)

 

“It is essential that the next conservative Administration place a high priority on reforming the DOJ and its culture to align the department with its core purposes and advance the national interest. Critically, this must include the FBI. Anything other than a top-to-bottom overhaul will only further erode the trust of significant portions of the American people and harm the very fabric that holds together our constitutional republic. At a practical level, not reforming the Department of Justice will also guarantee the failure of that conservative Administration’s agenda in countless other ways.”  (Ref. 1, page 547)

 

“The evidence shows that the Biden Administration’s Department of Justice has failed to protect law-abiding citizens and has ignored its most basic obligations. It has become at once utterly unserious and dangerously politicized. Prosecution and charging decisions are infused with racial and partisan political double standards. Immigration laws are ignored. The FBI harasses protesting parents (branded “domestic terrorists” by some partisans) while working diligently to shut down politically disfavored speech on the pretext of its being “misinformation” or “disinformation.” A department that prosecutes FACE Act cases while ignoring dozens of violent attacks on pregnancy care centers and/or the coordinated violation of laws that prohibit attempts to intimidate Supreme Court Justices by parading outside of their homes has clearly lost its way. A department that has twice engaged in covert domestic election interference and propaganda operations—the Russian collusion hoax in 2016 and the Hunter Biden laptop suppression in 2020—is a threat to the Republic.”  (Ref. 1, page 548)

 

 

“RESTORING THE FBI’S INTEGRITY

…the next conservative Administration should begin to restore the FBI’s domestic reputation and integrity and enhance its effectiveness in meeting actual foreign threats. To do so, the next conservative Administration should:

  • Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all major active FBI investigations and activities and terminate any that are unlawful or contrary to the national interest…. To conduct this review, the department should detail attorney appointees with criminal, national security, or homeland security backgrounds to catalogue any questionable activities and elevate them to appropriate DOJ leadership consistent with the new chain of command (discussed below).
  • Align the FBI’s placement within the department and the federal government with its law enforcement and national security purposes…. The next conservative Administration should direct the Attorney General to remove the FBI from the Deputy Attorney General’s direct supervision within the department’s organizational chart and instead place it under the general supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and the supervision of the Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division, as applicable….
  • Prohibit the FBI from engaging, in general, in activities related to combating the spread of so-called misinformation and disinformation by Americans who are not tied to any plausible criminal activity…. The United States government and, by extension, the FBI have absolutely no business policing speech, whether in the public square, in print, or online. The First Amendment prohibits it. The United States is the world’s last best hope for self-government, and its survival relies on the ability of our people to have healthy debate free from government intervention and censorship….
  • Streamline the non–law enforcement functions within the FBI, such as its Office of General Counsel, and obtain those services from other offices within the department…. the FBI maintains a core of approximately 300 attorneys within its Office of General Counsel, … Legal advice should come from attorneys at the DOJ, whether those attorneys are within the Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the Justice Management Division, or the Office of Legal Counsel. Moving legal review outside the FBI would serve as a crucial check on an agency that has recently pushed past legal boundary after legal boundary…
  • Submit a legislative proposal to Congress to eliminate the 10-year term for the Director… The Director of the FBI must remain politically accountable to the President in the same manner as the head of any other federal department or agency. To ensure prompt political accountability and to rein in perceived or actual abuses, the next conservative Administration should seek a legislative change to align the FBI Director’s position with those of the heads of all other major departments and agencies.” (Ref. 1, pages 549 – 552)

 

“Juxtaposed against this increase in violent crime are things like Attorney General Merrick Garland’s October 4, 2021, memorandum directing the commitment of significant resources and energies to combating imaginary, politically convenient threats of violence toward members of school boards and their staffs during the heat of the Virginia gubernatorial race.38 There was no similar effort to investigate elected officials and other public officers who conspired with outside allies to target and harass parents who were merely exercising their constitutional and statutory rights.39 If we are to continue to have informed and civil dialogue in the United States on issues of public concern, the DOJ must enforce applicable civil rights laws in an even-handed way when citizens’ livelihoods are threatened merely because they have exercised their rights.”  (Ref. 1, page 552)

 

“Enhancing the Federal Focus on and Resources in Jurisdictions with Rule-of-Law Deficiencies. A disturbing number of state and local jurisdictions have enacted policies that directly undermine public safety, leave doubt about whether criminals will be punished, and weaken the rule of law. While the prosecution of criminal offenses in most jurisdictions across the country must remain the responsibility of state and local governments, the federal government owes a special responsibility to Americans in jurisdictions where state and local prosecutors have abdicated this duty….

  • Use applicable federal laws to bring federal charges against criminals when local jurisdictions wrongfully allow them to evade responsibility for their conduct….
  • Where warranted and proper under federal law, initiate legal action against local officials—including District Attorneys—who deny American citizens the “equal protection of the laws” by refusing to prosecute criminal offenses in their jurisdictions. This holds true particularly for jurisdictions that refuse to enforce the law against criminals based on the Left’s favored defining characteristics of the would-be offender (race, so-called gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.) or other political considerations (e.g., immigration status).
  • Pursue policies and legislation that encourage prosecution of violent crimes as well as appropriate sentences for such offenses. The Biden Administration has adopted policies that do not prevent armed career criminals, who actually commit violent crimes, from committing those crimes. “ (Ref. 1, pages 553 – 554)

 

“Secure the border, which is the key entry point for many criminal organizations and their supplies, products, and employees…. In addition to finalizing the southwestern land border wall, the next Administration should take a creative and aggressive approach to tackling these dangerous criminal organizations at the border. This could include use of active-duty military personnel and National Guardsmen to assist in arrest operations along the border—something that has not yet been done. A new and forceful approach to interdiction will have a ripple effect on the operations of these criminal organizations, which currently operate freely without concern for criminal prosecution, and will lay the necessary groundwork for initial prosecutions of these organizations and their leaders.”  (Ref. 1, page 555)

 

“Promptly and Properly Eliminating Lawless Policies, Investigations, and Cases, Including All Existing Consent Decrees. Few things undermine the DOJ’s credibility more than brazenly partisan and ideologically driven prosecution of an Administration’s perceived political enemies, yet the department has readily indulged in such misadventures during the Biden Administration. Before even entering the Robert F. Kennedy building on January 20, 2025, the next Administration should:

  • Conduct a thorough review of all publicly available policies, investigations, and cases.
  • In a manner consistent with applicable law, prepare a plan to end immediately any policies, investigations, or cases that run contrary to law or Administration policies.
  • Ensure that upon the next President’s inauguration, appointees at the department obtain information about anything that was not learned before taking office and conduct the same analysis.” (Ref. 1, page 557)

 

“Engaging in Zealous Advocacy for and Defense of the Constitution and Lawful Administration Regulations and Policies. The Department of Justice has the exclusive responsibility for the “conduct of litigation in which the United States, an agency, or officer thereof”60 is involved and has been charged with the supervision of “all litigation to which the United States, an agency, or officer thereof is a party.”61 However, in politically contentious cases, Assistant United States Attorneys and other line prosecutors during conservative Administrations seek to influence outcomes of cases not because of any legal deficiency in the case or policy being defended, but by refusing to take certain positions, by writing public letters of protest, and by engaging in faux resignations from certain internal appointments. This can cause the department to take positions that are inconsistent with the interests of the President and his appointees in other places throughout the Administration…. Ultimately, the department will have to make tough calls as it manages its litigation, but those calls must always be consistent with the President’s policy agenda and the rule of law. A line attorney should never either directly or indirectly pursue a policy agenda through litigation that is inconsistent with the agenda of his or her client agency or the President. The department should also be cognizant of any attempts to slow litigation and outlast the Administration to avoid finality. The next conservative Administration should therefore:

  • Issue guidance to ensure that litigation decisions are consistent with the President’s agenda and the rule of law.
  • Ensure that, consistent with this principle, the department’s leadership is prepared to impose appropriate disciplinary action as circumstances arise.” (Ref. 1, page 559)

 

“Pursuing Equal Protection for All Americans by Vigorously Enforcing Applicable Federal Civil Rights Laws in Government, Education, and the Private Sector. Entities across the private and public sectors in the United States have been besieged in recent years by an unholy alliance of special interests, radicals in government, and the far Left. This unholy alliance speaks in platitudes about advancing the interests of certain segments of American society, but that advancement comes at the expense of other Americans and in nearly all cases violates long-standing federal law.

 

Even though numerous federal laws prohibit discrimination based on notable immutable characteristics such as race and sex, the Biden Administration— through the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and other federal entities—has enshrined affirmative discrimination in all aspects of its operations under the guise of “equity.” Federal agencies and their components have established so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices that have become the vehicles for this unlawful discrimination, and all departments and agencies have created “equity” plans to carry out these invidious schemes.”  (Ref. 1, page 561)

 

“Announcing a Campaign to Enforce the Criminal Prohibitions in 18 U.S. Code §§ 1461 and 1462 Against Providers and Distributors of Abortion Pills That Use the Mail. Federal law prohibits mailing “[e]very article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion.” Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, there is now no federal prohibition on the enforcement of this statute. The Department of Justice in the next conservative Administration should therefore announce its intent to enforce federal law against providers and distributors of such pills.”  (Ref. 1, page 562)

 

“Reassigning Responsibility for Prosecuting Election-Related Offenses from the Civil Rights Division to the Criminal Division. The Attorney General in the next conservative Administration should reassign responsibility for prosecuting violations of 18 U.S. Code § 241 from the Civil Rights Division to the Criminal Division where it belongs. Otherwise, voter registration fraud and unlawful ballot correction will remain federal election offenses that are never appropriately investigated and prosecuted.

 

Voter fraud includes unlawful practices concerning voter registration and ballot correction. When state legislatures are silent as to procedures for absentee ballot curing or provide specific rules governing that curing, neither counties nor courts may create a cure right where one does not exist, may not modify the law on curing, and certainly cannot engage in creating consent orders with the force of law that are inconsistent with the orders of other similarly situated counties.”  (Ref. 1, pages 562 – 563)

 

“Ensuring Proper Distribution of DOJ Grant Funds…. During the Trump Administration, a condition added to grants stated that an awardee had to comply with all federal law (stock language), including federal law regarding the exchange of information between federal and local authorities about an individual’s immigration status. This condition prevented law enforcement in “sanctuary cities” from receiving grant awards. While the Trump Administration suffered a series of setbacks from several hostile courts, it obtained from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals a decision upholding the department’s authority to impose these conditions. To ensure that taxpayer-funded grants are prioritized and distributed properly, the next conservative Administration should:

  • Conduct an immediate, comprehensive review of all federal grant disbursals to ensure not only that the programs are being properly administered by the department, but also that the grant funding is being received and used properly by recipients.
  • Order an overhaul of the DOJ grant application process, to include more rigorous vetting of state, local, and private grant applicants and inclusion of more pre-application criteria to ensure baseline fitness and eligibility for federal grant dollars. This long-overdue enhancement of the grant application and issuance process will ensure that hard-earned taxpayer dollars are going only to lawful actors who support federal law enforcement and demonstrate the ability and willingness to engage in lawful activities.” (Ref. 1, pages 565 – 566)

“Ensuring Proper Enforcement and Administration of Our Immigration Laws…. The DOJ and its leadership must intentionally prioritize fulfillment of the department’s immigration-related responsibilities in the next conservative Administration. This will be no small task, as these responsibilities play out across nearly every DOJ office and component. If they hope to fulfill their responsibilities as assigned by Congress and deliver results for the American people, the department and the Attorney General should:

  • Issue guidance to all U.S. Attorneys emphasizing the importance of prosecuting immigration offenses, and immigration-related offenses. The brunt of these offenses is born by districts along the southwestern border with Mexico, but the simple fact remains that immigration and immigration-related offenses are present in every district across the country. Successfully pursuing the priorities outlined in this chapter will require creative use of the various immigration and immigration-related authorities in close partnership with the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and other appropriate federal entities depending on the situation.
  • Pursue appropriate steps to assist the Department of Homeland Security in obtaining information about criminal aliens in jurisdictions across the United States, particularly those inside “sanctuary” jurisdictions.
  • Examine and consider the appropriateness of withdrawing or overturning every immigration decision rendered by Attorney General Garland (and any successor Attorney General during President Biden’s term). The Attorney General should pick up where the Attorneys General under President Trump left off and exercise his or her authority to adjudicate cases and provide guidance in appropriate cases to correct erroneous decisions, provide clarity, and align Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) decisions with the law.
  • At a minimum, pursue through rulemaking—and in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security where appropriate—the promulgation of every rule related to immigration that was issued during the Trump Administration….
  • Pursue a more vigorous anti-fraud program within the EOIR. In perhaps no other area of law are there more attorneys who commit acts of fraud against their clients—advancing completely meritless arguments in exchange for exorbitant fees—than there are in the area of immigration. Fraud and unethical behavior are rampant in the immigration system and must be addressed—not only to ensure that the federal government is operating in a proper manner, but also for the sake of the aliens involved in the process as well as the integrity/credibility of the members of the private immigration bar who do not engage in such conduct.” (Ref. 1, pages 567 – 569)

 

“Ensure the assignment of sufficient political appointees throughout the department. Ensuring adequate accountability throughout the DOJ requires the intentional devotion of sufficient resources by the Administration—not simply replicating what was done under prior Administrations and reflected in the Plum Book. The number of appointees serving throughout the department in prior Administrations—particularly during the Trump Administration—has not been sufficient either to stop bad things from happening through proper management or to promote the President’s agenda.

It is not enough for political appointees to serve in obvious offices like the Office of the Attorney General or the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. The next conservative Administration must make every effort to obtain the resources to support a vast expansion of the number of appointees in every office and component across the department—especially in the Civil Rights Division, the FBI, and the EOIR.”  (Ref. 1, page 569)

References:

  1. Mandate for Leadership, The Conservative Promise, Project 2025, Presidential Transition Project; https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf