President Donald Trump’s decision to fire more than a dozen federal inspectors general, tasked with serving as government watchdogs, has triggered a wave of criticism from former federal prosecutors and legal experts. The move, announced late Friday, has even drawn opposition from some of Trump’s allies.
According to CNN, Trump terminated at least 17 independent watchdogs across multiple federal agencies, including the Departments of State, Energy, Interior, Defense, and Transportation. The inspector general received an email from Sergio Gor, head of the White House Office of Presidential Personnel, stating that “changing priorities” necessitated their “immediate termination.”
The firings allow Trump to install his own appointees in the roles, a move that critics argue undermines the independence of these key positions. Former White House Communications Director Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Trump’s actions reflect a sharper understanding of how to consolidate control.
“You’re watching in real-time as Donald Trump’s gotten a lot smarter about how to make the government work for him,” Griffin said. “This time, his team is aware of those limits — and plans to push them.” Legal experts Jennifer Rodgers and Jeffrey Toobin also weighed in, expressing alarm over the implications of the purge. “This is a huge disaster,” said Rodgers.
“Inspectors general are the principal internal watchdog of the executive branch of government. These are apolitical people who search for fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption. And he’s taken them out. Why? Because he doesn’t want scrutiny on what he and the agency heads he’s putting in place are going to be doing for the next four years.”
Rodgers argued that the firings are not only unethical but also illegal. “The law is quite clear,” she said, noting that presidents must provide 30 days’ notice to Congress and a detailed, case-specific rationale for removing inspectors general. She called on the Senate to scrutinize Trump’s new nominees and push back against the dismissals.
Toobin echoed Rodgers’ concerns, underscoring the legal violations. “You can’t fire inspectors general the way that Trump did,” he said. “The approach here is simply to flood the zone—do as many of these kinds of things as possible.”
Critics argue the mass firings erode accountability and transparency within the federal government, as inspectors general are critical to rooting out fraud and abuse. While Trump’s administration has defended the decision as part of its realignment of priorities, legal challenges are expected as questions mount over the legality of the abrupt dismissals.
With both chambers of Congress under Republican control, opponents of the purge are concerned about the lack of checks and balances, leaving the courts as the primary avenue for challenging the administration’s actions.