In early December, seven United States Attorneys were dismissed from their jobs. Recently released e-mails exchanged between White House Counsel Harriet Miers and the Attorney General’s chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson show that the criteria set to fire U.S. Attorneys were inappropriate. Sampson wrote to Miers that attorneys should be retained not only for good performance but also for demonstrating “loyalty to the president and attorney general.” Attorneys should be removed if they have been “ineffectual managers and prosecutors” or have “chafed against Administration initiatives.”
The plan to oust the prosecutors was the brainchild of Miers and Sampson and had been in the works for nearly two years. At this point it is unclear who in the White House, other than Miers, signed off on the firing. But Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez had to have known about them. He either knew of the criteria for firing these attorneys or purposely didn’t ask about why they were being dismissed in order to appear removed from the decision.
In calling for the firing of these attorneys, the White House has overstepped its boundaries once again. It has sidestepped Congressional oversight in U.S. attorney appointments. A provision in the Reauthorization of the Patriot Act, signed in 2006, allows U.S. attorneys to be appointed without approval from the Senate. Previously, the AG could unilaterally appoint attorneys, but within 120 days they would have to be confirmed by the President or the President would have to present a replacement, and this appointment would have to be approved by the Senate. But due to the provision, United States attorneys appointed by the AG can serve an indefinite amount of time. It was easier for the Administration to clean house—to do some ideological cleansing—because it didn’t have to get Senate confirmation for new appointments.
Investigations into the reasons for these firings and who was involved in them are necessary. In addition, Alberto Gonzalez must step down as Attorney General. Firing U.S. attorneys for political reasons, not ones of competence, is a line that should not be crossed. According to President of the Governance Institute Russell Wheeler, “micromanaging U.S. attorneys’ decisions about individual cases’ prosecutorial merit, including doing so through threats of, or actual, removal from office” is not under the AG’s job description. Gonzalez is responsible for what occurs in his Department and the dismissal of competent attorneys for political reasons is inexcusable. Unlike the now jobless U.S. attorneys, he should step down for his performance, not for his ideology.
