Ex-DOJ Officials Publish Farewell Letters Warning of Eroding Norms and Growing Fear

Former Justice Department staff who lost their jobs this year have begun publishing their exit letters online, assembling a public archive of farewell notes that range from quiet regret to urgent warnings about the direction of the agency. The collection, organized by Justice Connection, highlights statements from career prosecutors and nonpartisan attorneys who say recent departures reflect a larger threat to prosecutorial norms and the rule of law.

What Justice Connection is documenting

Justice Connection, founded by former Justice Department civil-division attorney Stacey Young, says the wave of departures — including resignations, firings, and retirements — has exceeded 5,000 since January. The group has posted dozens of goodbye messages to preserve the first-hand accounts of officials who were removed or who left in protest.

Voices from the letters

Many of the posted notes are personal, forceful and principled. Some warn that removing career prosecutors without explanation will chill independent decision-making; others emphasize pride in colleagues and work that upheld the nation's institutions.

“If a career prosecutor can be fired without reason, fear may seep into the decisions of those who remain . . . Do not let that happen,” wrote Maureen Comey, a former New York federal prosecutor and daughter of former FBI Director James Comey. She added, “Fear is the tool of a tyrant, wielded to suppress independent thought.” Comey has filed a lawsuit alleging her removal was unlawful and unconstitutional.

“If no lawyer within earshot of the President is willing to give him that advice, then I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool, or enough of a coward, to file your motion . . . But it was never going to be me,” wrote Hagan Scotten after resigning from the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York following the decision to drop a prosecution of New York City’s mayor.

“The people in charge who are supposed to protect us — our fellow Americans who we elected, along with those who were appointed, and swore an OATH to protect this nation and our Constitution — now use the Constitution as a weapon to suit their own ends,” wrote Patty Hartman, who said her abrupt dismissal included immediate loss of access to her government phone and computer. “It was important for me to publicly acknowledge my illegal termination because so many others were experiencing it and, quite frankly, I was pissed off.”

Other departures were framed by professional principle rather than partisan critique. Michael Romano, who worked on Jan. 6 prosecutions, reflected on the Capitol cases and the importance of holding rioters accountable: “Many rioters saw their relationship with the rule of law as transactional . . . And, but for the work of the Capitol Siege Section, they would have been right.” Romano said he wanted colleagues to know he stood behind that work.

Meredith Burrell, a former civil-rights office attorney, contrasted a 25-year career devoted to protecting marginalized people with the last months she served: “I am still processing the contrast between those 25 years and the last four months.”

Not all letters were condemnatory. Several expressed gratitude for colleagues and for law-enforcement partners. Greg Rosen, who led the unit that prosecuted January 6 cases, thanked teammates and officers injured protecting Congress: “You represent the highest ideals of our nation — unwavering in your commitment to the rule of law and the peaceful transfer of power.”

Sybil Barksdale, formerly with the Office on Violence Against Women, reflected on a long career across administrations: “Throughout my career, through changing administrations, evolving legal landscapes, and countless initiatives, I had the privilege of working alongside exceptional colleagues who shared an unwavering dedication to justice and protecting those most vulnerable.”

An ex-FBI analyst who resigned summarized a common refrain among these notes: “If I learned anything in the FBI, it is that yes, you can say no. If something is wrong, unjust, or unethical, you speak up, and sometimes speaking up means saying 'no.'”

Why the archive matters

Organizers say preserving these messages creates a public record of the departures so they are not “lost to history.” The letters provide firsthand perspectives on why career officials left or were removed and offer insight into how those departures may affect prosecutorial independence and public trust in the Justice Department.

The Justice Department did not provide a comment about the wave of departures or the public collection of farewell letters.