Following last week’s dismissal of Pam Bondi after just 14 months as Attorney General, the Wall Street Journal posed a pointed question: is there a worse job in Washington than serving as Trump’s top lawyer?
The answer, for lawyers watching the revolving door at the Justice Department, appears to be no.
The inherent tension is structural. Presidents legitimately expect their AG to execute policy priorities. However, Trump’s expectations reportedly extend further, seeking prosecutors who will target political opponents and stretch legal boundaries to serve electoral goals. As the Journal bluntly observed: “This is a losing proposition.”
Bondi’s tenure illustrated the problem. Her mishandling of the Epstein files, where promised revelations never materialised, inflamed conspiracy theories rather than quieting them. Court rejections of unconfirmed U.S. Attorney appointments and judicial dismissals of indictments against James Comey and Letitia James compounded the difficulties. Her inability to say “no” proved costly.
The Journal contrasts this with Bill Barr’s first-term approach: publicly defending the President while privately providing candid legal advice, including unwelcome conclusions about 2020 election fraud claims. That independence ultimately cost Barr his relationship with Trump, yet arguably served the administration’s legal interests.
Whoever succeeds Bondi faces the same impossible brief. Jay Clayton, currently at SDNY, offers credibility and Senate relationships. But the fundamental question remains: can anyone provide the independent counsel the role demands while satisfying this President’s expectations?
