Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
Eight former inspectors general have filed a lawsuit against President Trump, arguing that their abrupt dismissals violated federal laws designed to protect government watchdogs from political interference.
Some shit you should know before you read: Roughly two weeks into his presidency, President Trump fired 17 inspectors general across multiple federal agencies, citing “changing priorities” as the reason for their immediate removal. These watchdogs, responsible for independent oversight of government operations, were dismissed through brief emails from the Office of Presidential Personnel without prior warning. Under federal law, specifically the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022, a president must notify Congress at least 30 days before removing an inspector general and provide a detailed, case-specific rationale for the decision. This bipartisan law was enacted to prevent political interference in IGs’ investigative work and to ensure transparency in their removal. Despite these legal requirements, Trump proceeded with the firings without giving Congress advance notice or justification.
What’s going on now: According to court documents filed in Washington, DC, eight of the fired inspectors general are suing President Trump and the heads of their former agencies, arguing that their dismissals were unlawful. The lawsuit claims that Trump violated the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022 by failing to notify Congress 30 days in advance and by not providing the required “substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons” for their removal. The former watchdogs argue that their firings amount to illegal political interference, undermining their ability to investigate waste, fraud, and abuse within federal agencies. They are asking the court to void their terminations, which would mean they are still the rightful inspectors general until the president complies with the law.
Trump’s view: President Trump has defended the firings, dismissing concerns about their legality. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, he claimed that removing inspectors general was “a very common thing to do” and insisted that some watchdogs “were not doing their job.” The administration has not provided specific allegations against the dismissed IGs, nor has it submitted the required explanations to Congress.
Bipartisan concerns: The firings have sparked some bipartisan backlash in Congress, with lawmakers insisting that Trump must follow the law. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) sent a letter to the White House demanding compliance. In his letter, he wrote, “While IGs aren’t immune from committing acts requiring their removal, and they can be removed by the president, the law must be followed.” Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) echoed those concerns, stating that the lack of transparency “undermines public confidence in the Inspector General community.”
