“`html
WASHINGTON — During the confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland as President Joe Biden’s attorney general, Garland expressed a desire to reduce the hyper-political tone surrounding the Justice Department, aiming to re-establish it as a non-partisan entity. However, his tenure didn’t unfold as many had hoped.
Garland stepped into this pivotal role with a vision of stabilizing the department after a tumultuous period under former President Donald Trump, who had dismissed one attorney general and had conflict with another. Now, as Garland prepares to leave office, he finds the department facing intense scrutiny from all sides, with his legacy under debate.
Critics from the right are outraged at the Justice Department’s pursuit of accountability for Trump regarding attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. They suggest that prosecutors have gone too easy on Hunter Biden, Biden’s son. Conversely, many Democrats believe Garland has not taken sufficient action against Trump in the aftermath of the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Additionally, there is dissatisfaction within party ranks concerning his reliance on special counsel, seen by some as having made excessive political comments about the president.
Privately, some senior aides in the Biden administration have voiced doubts about Garland’s effectiveness, implying that he may have been too cautious in demonstrating his independence from the Democratic president.
As Garland transitions the department back to Trump, concerns grow regarding potential retribution against those deemed adversaries. Trump has positioned loyalists to lead the Justice Department, with intentions to dismantle what he labels a “deep state” threatening his interests.
Sources close to Garland acknowledge that his assignment was profoundly complicated. He took over during a fraught political environment following the Capitol attack and inherited a Justice Department shaken by scandals throughout Trump’s presidency. Garland confronted numerous politically sensitive challenges.
“Merrick Garland faced a series of impossible decisions,” remarks Vanita Gupta, a high-ranking Justice Department official under Garland prior to her departure from government last year. “No recent AG has grappled with such a challenging set of circumstances.”
Although the Justice Department declined to facilitate an interview with Garland, advocates highlight that he remained steadfast in his commitment to impartiality despite significant external pressures. “His leadership was marked by energetic compassion aimed at revitalizing the Justice Department,” said Marshall Miller, who held a senior role before exiting the department.
Unfortunately, in a time of extreme political divide, Garland’s strategies have tended to frustrate almost everyone outside his agency. He has, at times, strongly defended the department, stating during a congressional hearing that he “would not be intimidated” by external narratives.
In his farewell address to department staff, he asserted, “You have worked to pursue justice — not politics,” aiming to dispel misconceptions surrounding the department’s operations. Yet Garland often appeared uneasy in the media spotlight, leading to opinions that he could have better articulated the rationale behind his decisions. His tenure was marked by Republican claims of the department’s politicization and even remarks from Biden suggesting concerns over a biased justice system.
Garland was previously the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and was nominated in 2016 by President Barack Obama. His nomination was stalled by Republican senators, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who argued that the next president should select the nominee due to the proximity to the upcoming election. Reflecting several years later, Garland described the nomination as an “enormous honor,” despite his disappointment at not being confirmed.
Garland’s judicial background includes substantial experience within the Justice Department where he worked under five different attorneys general and is notably recognized for overseeing the prosecution of Timothy McVeigh in relation to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
Insiders maintain that Garland defended the agency vigorously, particularly by personally sanctioning the FBI’s controversial decision to search Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate for classified documents, despite facing backlash regarding the FBI’s actions.
Unlike his predecessor, William Barr, who openly critiqued career prosecutors, Garland affirmed the essential role of department lawyers, calling them the “heart and soul” of the organization. His commitment to nurturing morale within the department has reportedly had a positive impact.
Under Garland, the Justice Department pursued multiple civil rights investigations that identified significant abuse within law enforcement agencies, and it intensified efforts against monopolistic practices by tech giants like Google and Apple. Yet, political investigations ultimately dominated his agenda.
Garland faced not only the scrutiny surrounding Trump and the 2020 election but also challenges involving investigations into Biden and his son. In appointing special counsels to manage these inquiries, he aimed to establish a clear barrier against political bias.
The Capitol riot, which occurred on the day news broke of Garland’s nomination, became a pivotal issue during his time in office. By the time he officially became attorney general in March 2021, the department was already engaged in charging rioters, undertaking the largest investigation in its history.
Although noting that the investigations were ongoing, Garland refrained from confirming whether Trump was part of the inquiries. However, he did reveal the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith to oversee the probe into Trump’s handling of classified documents shortly after Trump’s announcement of his 2024 presidential candidacy.
While the investigation into classified documents appeared straightforward, it encountered delays due to various legal challenges. Critics voiced concern regarding the pace of investigations, arguing for more urgency in addressing the events of January 6.
Garland’s defenders, however, maintain that the department displayed diligence from the beginning, establishing a specialized unit to look into Trump associates who were present during the Capitol incident. Yet, this inquiry faced roadblocks amid legal disputes regarding executive privilege.
The challenges have been tremendous, particularly as Trump has made a political comeback amid ongoing legal issues. He has framed the Justice Department’s actions against him as partisan attacks while also announcing plans to nominate individuals with loyalty to him for future leadership roles within the agency.
Inside the Biden administration, there has been increasing discontent with Garland’s performance, particularly as ongoing investigations scrutinize both President Biden and his son Hunter. Reports emerged indicating that White House officials expressed dissatisfaction with the language used in a special counsel report concerning Biden’s classified document management.
As Garland prepares to exit, he is likely to witness the unraveling of many initiatives pursued during his term. Reports suggest that parts of Smith’s findings on Trump’s case might not be publicly disclosed due to ongoing appeals involving co-defendants.
Moreover, the future of the investigation into the January 6 events is uncertain, particularly with Trump pledging to pardon several individuals convicted in relation to the riot. The dynamic escalates as President Biden has similarly addressed legal challenges concerning his son, leading to internal frustrations among Justice Department officials.
In a touching farewell, Justice Department employees showed their support for Garland as he departed, marking the end of a tumultuous chapter. In his closing remarks, Garland warned of the potential misuse of authority, emphasizing the need for discernment regarding capability versus ethical judgment.
“`
