Washington — Former U.S. pardon attorney Elizabeth Oyer filed a lawsuit on Thursday in federal court in Washington, D.C., alleging that the Justice Department illegally terminated her employment. Oyer says she was asked to set aside her concerns about actor Mel Gibson’s history of domestic violence and to recommend that he regain firearm access, a request she refused.
Background on the dispute
Oyer served as the pardon attorney from 2022 until early 2025, overseeing clemency applications and advising senior officials on the Constitution’s limits. In her complaint, she asserts that a senior staff member of Attorney General Todd Blanche, then deputy attorney general, pressured her to recommend a pardon for Gibson despite the actor’s documented violent record.
When Oyer declined, she says she received termination papers delivered by security officers. The notice cited the President’s Article II authority – a constitutional provision that empowers the executive branch – as the basis for her dismissal.
Oyer’s statement and constitutional concerns
“This case is about much more than what happened to me,” Oyer said in a statement. “If career officials like me can be fired for refusing to bend the rules to serve the President’s friends, then the message to every public servant is clear: loyalty to a politician matters more than loyalty to the Constitution.”
The lawsuit seeks a court order declaring the termination unlawful, reinstating Oyer to federal service, and restoring her back pay. She previously appealed the firing to the Merit Systems Protection Board in April 2025, but an administrative judge dismissed that appeal.
Attorney General’s response
Attorney General Blanche, testifying before Democratic lawmakers in July, denied that Gibson’s case was the reason for Oyer’s dismissal. “I didn’t even know of that. I had known nothing about Mel Gibson or that letter when I fired her. Nothing,” he told the committee.
Blanche suggested the firing was linked to Oyer’s prior recommendations on commutations for former President Joe Biden. Oyer told lawmakers the next day that this was the first time she heard her termination might be tied to those recommendations.
Political implications
The suit adds to a growing list of legal challenges against the Trump administration’s handling of career civil servants. Critics argue that using presidential authority to remove officials who refuse politically motivated requests undermines the merit‑based civil service system protected by the Constitution.
Supporters of the administration contend that the President has broad discretion to manage executive branch personnel and that the lawsuit is an attempt to politicize routine personnel decisions.
Next steps
The case will proceed through the federal courts, where judges will weigh the administration’s reliance on Article II authority against the civil service protections that shield career officials from retaliation. The outcome could set a precedent for how far a president may go in directing career employees on matters that intersect with political allies.
The Justice Department has not responded to requests for comment.
Original reporting: Appleton, WI News Feed (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
