Pardon Attorney Fired After Refusal to Restore Gun Rights to Trump “Special Ambassador” to Hollywood
[guest post by Dana]
Paying the price for professional dissent:
The former U.S. pardon attorney, Elizabeth G. Oyer, was terminated Friday after she opposed restoring actor Mel Gibson’s rights to carry a gun, her spokesperson and two Justice Department officials familiar with the matter told NBC News.
A spokesperson for Oyer said that she was not told why she was terminated but that because of the sequence of events she believes her refusal to carry out a request from officials in the deputy attorney general’s office to add Gibson’s name to a list of people to have their gun rights restored may have played a role. . .
In a statement to NBC News, Oyer described a climate of fear within the Justice Department.
“Unfortunately, experienced professionals throughout the Department are afraid to voice their opinions because dissent is being punished,” she said. “Decisions are being made based on relationships and loyalty, not based on facts or expertise or sound analysis, which is very alarming given that what is at stake is our public safety.”
It was just several hours after refusing to add Gibson’s name to the list that Oyer was terminated. She explained how the issue of restoring one’s right to own a gun after involvement in a domestic violence is a matter that is taken very seriously by pardon attorneys:
"…When I came into work on Friday morning, I said to a colleague, I really think that Mel Gibson might be my downfall."
Former U.S. Pardon Attorney Liz Oyer speaks to @kaitlancollins after being fired last week. pic.twitter.com/8O8kPhL3I4
— TheSourceCNN (@TheSourceCNN) March 12, 2025
As a reminder, back on January, Trump named Mel Gibson as one of three “special ambassadors” to Hollywood:
“It is my honor to announce Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, to be Special Ambassadors to a great but very troubled place, Hollywood, California,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Thursday. “They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood, which has lost much business over the last four years to Foreign Countries, BACK—BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE! These three very talented people will be my eyes and ears, and I will get done what they suggest. It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood!”
It’s not hard to connect the dots here.
—Dana
Hello.
Dana (7e24d3) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:19 pmRelated, about Trump and Perkins Coie having its security clearance yanked…
Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:35 pm>He is trying to defenestrate Perkins Coie to intimidate elite law firms from representing his opponents or plaintiffs who challenge his policies.
Of course he is.
Trumpists will defend it by arguing either that (a) the libs did it first, or (b) the actions of this law firm were so egregious that they are a special case.
But it’s pretty clear to anyone who isn’t a Trumpist that the intent here is to make it functionally impossible (or at least very difficult and expensive) to use legal process to constrain the administration.
aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:38 pmIt is easy to connect the dots. She was repeatedly warned that her refusal would be considered insubordination and she persisted. It’s how hierarchies work. The bosses make the rules.
What she did was, in a culture where the bosses are looking for people refusing to implement department policy, she stood out. It’s probably not the best way to run the department, but it is A way. If it were Biden’s DOJ and she was somehow blocking Hunter’s pardon, she’d be fired there, too.
——–
One wonders who the other people on that restoral list were and what she felt differed in Gibson’s case.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:44 pmTrumpists will defend it by arguing either that (a) the libs did it first
The Dems didn’t operate that way. OTOH, they did pressure banks to stop offering banking services to NGOs who they didn’t like. Hard to do business without a bank account. Probably harder than without a security clearance.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:46 pmYet again, the Gibson lesson: don’t call your ex on the phone while dead drunk.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 3:47 pmI bot, connecting the dots means something different to you, Kevin. But if you watch the full video, Oyer opines on domestic violence and guns. It makes sense.
Dana (4ad805) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:03 pmNo, Kevin, I don’t think so. The New York Times, now behind paywall, had more details. The story is Byzantine and I don’t mean Hagia Sophia, more like Empress Theodora:
1. Bove/Blanche asked the Office of the Pardon Attorney to form a special task force to recommend restoration of gun rights to worthy folks.
2. The Office did just that and submitted a list of 95 (ninety-five) names.
3. Mel Gibson’s was not one of them.
4. Bove/Blanche pared it down to 9 names (nine) from the list submitted and asked Ms. Oyer to add Mel Gibson’s name as the tenth.
5. That’s when she said “Huh! What?” and the string ran out in the labyrinth.
It was never about restoring gun rights per se, it was only about doing Gibson a favor; but they needed to cover their asses if after giving him his gun back he shot the next “sugartits Jew” cop who pulled him over for drunk driving.
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:06 pmNice to know you can read motives, nk. Who where those 9? You must know that to determine why they added Gibson and not the other 86. Did they present a starting list? Why did hey expect Gibson’s name to be on it.
Also, having lived in Los Angeles for a while it comes as no surprise to me that the very limitedconcealed weapons permits are given for political favors.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:33 pmBut at point 5, when she balked, she was told that was a bad idea and she still balked. Integrity is great, but in a government hierarchy fighting city hall is a mistake. If your integrity costs you the job, you should be philosophical about it. Making a stink confuses your motives.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:36 pmWhat she wanted to do was refuse but not resign. Integrity only took her so far.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:37 pmOyer opines on domestic violence and guns. It makes sense.
It does, in the general case. Does she make the case why it should in Gibson’s? Also, again, she is not the victim here, she is someone who would not follow directives and found out there were consequences. Thoreau did not complain about being jailed for his disobedience. It was part of the deal and he knew it.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:41 pmKevin, in your view, what should she do if she thinks that this sort of political favor granting, in this context, is a threat to both public safety and the rule of law?
aphrael (0467ba) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:50 pmI bet, connecting the dots means something different to you, Kevin.
Why to you assert these “dots” are hard to connect? They seem pretty obvious.
Why they wanted Gibson to get his gun rights back? Not a problem. It was a political favor.
Why she got fired? Boss says “Do this”, subordinate says “No.” Repeat a few times and firings happen.
Am I shocked? No. I would not be shocked if Obama did it, but I expect sleaze from Trump.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:50 pmAm I shocked she went public? Also no. It will get her hired before the weekend by some “public interest” law firm.
Kevin, in your view, what should she do if she thinks that this sort of political favor granting, in this context, is a threat to both public safety and the rule of law?
Resign and say why.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/12/2025 @ 4:51 pmWhere you fall down, Kevin, is that Trump did not ask Oyer to pardon the J6 defendants. He just went ahead and done it. (And remember that drug dealer he pardoned with the photo-op with Kim Kardashian?)
Trump/Bondi/Blanche/Bove could have done the same thing with Gibson.
But they did not want their fingerprints on it.
They wanted Oyer’s.
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:02 pmResign and say why.
Sure. That’s what happened in the Eric Adams situation.
But why make it easy on the grifters?
Make them show their dirty undergarments.
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:06 pmKevin M,
The next time I stand up for a principle, I’ll be sure to remember that there will be people like you ready to shit on me for having done so.
Patterico (bdae43) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:11 pmTrump is doing the same with Ukraine.
Twisting Zelensky’s arm to sign a bad deal.
And when Putin breaks even the pitiful deal Trump imposes, Trump can say: “Don’t blame me, Zelensky signed it!”
nk (aed895) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:28 pmWhile I don’t think the pardon attorney should have been fired in this case, I do believe that the ban on firearms possession is overbroad and should only apply to those convicted of violent felonies.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/12/2025 @ 5:43 pmIn the NYT version, a familiar name emerges in this story, Emil Bove, the MAGA asshole who tried to force prosecutors at SDNY to drop the Eric Adams corruption.
More…
I’m skeptical that Ms. Oyer was unaware of how chummy Gibson was with Trump, but then she said her position wasn’t “flexible” about Gibson after hearing how chummy Gibson was with Trump. She made a choice, go with the law or with the Trump Mafia. It wouldn’t be “insubordination” in a typical adminstration, but it is in the Trump Crime Family, going against Trump’s capos.
Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/12/2025 @ 6:01 pm@18
You can still have your principles, and still follow directive from your superior even when you’ve made your objection known.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 6:30 pm@18
You can still have your principles, and still follow directive from your superior even when you’ve made your objection known.
whembly (b7cc46) — 3/12/2025 @ 6:31 pmRelated, a federal judge blocked Trump’s EO on Perkins Coie, and it wasn’t a gentle ruling…
Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/12/2025 @ 6:57 pm@kevin- I wouldn’t resign gracefully and give them an easy way to obtain my absence. If I thought they were trying to get rid of me, I’d make them fire me and blow the issue up.
Nic (120c94) — 3/12/2025 @ 7:52 pm@24 Paul, that’s a shocking ruling from an Obama judge. Totally unexpected. /s
lloyd (da9f74) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:09 pmApparently there are 2 types of anti-semitism. The bad kind that targets israel and the good kind that targets jews.
Davethulhu (6f1d81) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:21 pmDavethulhu, there’s also the kind that targets both and merits a green card.
lloyd (da9f74) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:26 pm“Davethulhu, there’s also the kind that targets both and merits a green card.”
oh, word?
Davethulhu (6f1d81) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:30 pmIt seems pretty clear she was fired for not setting her principles aside. The Trump way in these things seems the opposite of subtle, no doubt on purpose. I’m no fan of the Perkins firm either but the actions against it are obviously punitive. Trump and his people may not even care very much if these actions stand up as it’s about sending a message. They could have just refused to give Perkins any more business or, with Ms Oyer found some (probably dubious) pretext to fire her but that wouldn’t cause the fear in the ranks that they want.
And this is off topic, but to repeat a previous question, where is JVW? Apologize if I’ve missed something but have seen no posts or comments from JVW for weeks, nor that anyone answered DRJ who first asked about him. I hope JVW is OK and is not gone from this blog.
RL formerly in Glendale (c21ff9) — 3/12/2025 @ 8:59 pmRobert morris mega church paster and trump adviser indicted on child sex crimes. (texas tribune)
asset (08c45f) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:26 pmIndeed, that’s what all the MAGA pukes are saying.
Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/12/2025 @ 9:39 pmTo repeat what I wrote in teh open thread; I have no problem with executives making decisions they have the authority to make. If Trump or his appointee wants to use that discretion to do a favor for a friend that is contrary to precedent they can do so.
But pressuring staff to make that decision for them, and firing them for not doing what they expect you want, when that is in conflict with policy, is corrupt, and breeds a corrupt system that makes the United States a worse and less lawful country.
Time123 (bc0a3c) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:03 amThe next time I stand up for a principle, I’ll be sure to remember that there will be people like you ready to sh1t on me for having done so.
As I said, the principled thing was to resign. She wanted to work in the Trump administration and also keep her principles. It didn’t work and it shouldn’t have been expected to.
Why am I sh1tting on her to say that she should not have been surprised to get fired? It’s how DoJ works now in the new “non-weaponized” environment. I don’t see her as a victim, either. She probably has a better job already.
If they fire you they can cite their own reasons, which you will have to dispute. If you resign, you get to state the reasons without their input. In the NY Mayor case, they resigned and still managed to “blow the issue up” quite nicely.
And really, suppose they didn’t fire her. She have to remain in that environment until the next bowl of sh1t came along.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:37 amBut pressuring staff to make that decision for them, and firing them for not doing what they expect you want, when that is in conflict with policy, is corrupt, and breeds a corrupt system that makes the United States a worse and less lawful country.
You must have higher expectations of Trump than I do. He wanted GAETZ in this role. My only surprise is that this firing (or resignations) aren’t more common.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:41 amI do believe that the ban on firearms possession is overbroad and should only apply to those convicted of violent felonies.
Domestic violence is such a vague term, applied to one-off instances where someone snapped under provocation, and to people with a long and frequent history of violent abuse. The latter group shouldn’t have more than butter knives — women’s and family shelters are there for a reason.
It calls for some fact-finding beyond simple check boxes.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:50 amPaul, that’s a shocking ruling from an Obama judge. Totally unexpected
It is any other ruling from any other judge that would be shocking. The order against Perkins Coie was noxious on its face.
But I expect Trump to appeal this all the way up to a 9-0 SCOTUS loss.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/13/2025 @ 7:54 amYou can still have your principles, and still follow directive from your superior even when you’ve made your objection known.
That seems like a slippery slope towards having fewer principles. The moment you do what they demand, your argument next time is weaker and their respect for you much less.
If you are directed to do something you just cannot do, and they can fire you for not doing it, you have to resign. The position is no longer tenable for you.
There are situations where they CANNOT fire you for telling them to F.O., but not a lot of those. In which case you might stay around, after placing limits on what they can ask, so that they don’t replace you (as they might want to do) with one of their toadies.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/13/2025 @ 8:01 amSailing to Byzantium.
In the Eric Adams case, Acting US Attorney Danielle Sassoon resigned but nonetheless managed to have Trump’s fixer Emil Bove put down in writing that the order to dismiss the prosecution came from the “elected President” and his “Senate-confirmed Attorney General”.
The Pardon Attorney let herself get fired instead of resigning and preserved all her rights against unlawful termination.
I think both knew what seas they were navigating.
nk (05fe3c) — 3/13/2025 @ 9:00 amIf an action so shocked my conscience that I felt the need to resign, I would want to do it in the most public and newsmaking way possible.
The lady did not want to resign her job. She felt strongly about recommending a pardon for Mel Gibson. She hoped she could slide past recommending a pardon for Mel Gibson without quitting. When she couldn’t — the smart approach was to make a lot of noise and make the administration pay a price. The publicity probably got her the next job and allowed her to make a point about Trump administration cronyism. (I think the domestic violence point is likely secondary.)
Appalled (910a04) — 3/13/2025 @ 9:17 amGibson couldn’t be pardoned, he was convicted in state court. The sole issue was restoration of his constitutional right to bear arms, despite of having a misdemeanor conviction.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/13/2025 @ 9:29 am\The mel gibson issue might really be a coincidence, because Trump has dismissed so many other people (on more generaal grounds) They never told her, or hinted to her, that her job would depend on it. She reasoned this to herself.
This is just an attempt by Elizabeth G. Oyer to make this make sense to her. It might be a reasonable suspicion, had nit nso many other purges or firings not been going on at about the same time.
Sammy Finkelman (5ec475) — 3/13/2025 @ 10:45 am