ATLANTA — The Justice Department is set to adopt a new strategy for investigating elections and voting practices.


Conservative leaders have been advocating for significant changes within the department, seeking the removal of career staff, a rise in federal voter fraud investigations, and a deeper inquiry into the 2020 election results. These initiatives have prompted worries among voting rights advocates regarding the department’s future direction under Pam Bondi, a close supporter of former President Donald Trump who is facing a confirmation vote shortly.


Bondi has historically backed Trump’s attempts to challenge the validity of the 2020 election results in Pennsylvania and has consistently repeated his unfounded claims about the legitimacy of his defeat. During her Senate confirmation hearing, she notably avoided declaring that President Joe Biden won the election, merely stating her acceptance of the outcomes. Bondi has pledged to maintain independence if confirmed.


“No one should face prosecution for political reasons,” Bonds stated during her hearing with senators.


Following this hearing, the leading Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois, expressed concerns regarding Bondi’s answers to critical inquiries.


“Pam Bondi has shown her loyalty to Donald Trump and affluent special interests instead of the American public,” Durbin remarked in a January 15 statement. “The American populace deserves an attorney general who will consistently defend their voting rights, not just when it is politically advantageous.”


Bondi’s nomination is set to undergo a committee vote on Wednesday. If she is confirmed, her leadership could markedly change the department’s handling of voting rights violations. The conservative initiative, Project 2025, outlines the potential shifts that might occur under her influence.


Traditionally, the Justice Department has focused on combating voter suppression tactics and state laws that disenfranchise specific demographics. However, the creators of Project 2025 argue that the agency has “lost its direction” and has neglected to pursue investigations and prosecutions concerning election-related crimes, like voter fraud.


They claim that the department should have taken action against certain election officials involved in the 2020 electoral process, despite the absence of documented widespread fraud and the confirmation of results through various recounts and audits.


The report identifies Pennsylvania’s former chief election official as an individual who should have been scrutinized for possible federal law violations and suggests that election-related prosecutions be managed by the criminal division rather than the civil division. Numerous lawsuits promptly filed by Trump affiliates to overturn the 2020 results were dismissed by courts across the country, including in Pennsylvania.


During her confirmation hearing on January 15, when prompted about her willingness to uphold the nation’s voting and civil rights statutes, Bondi proclaimed her commitment to these principles, but the topic swiftly shifted to other matters.


Bondi, who previously served as Florida’s attorney general after two successful elections, echoed claims from Trump’s camp that the Justice Department has been manipulated for political ends. She pledged to put an end to what she referred to as the “weaponization” of the department under the Biden administration, a point that aligns with the goals of Project 2025.


On a separate note, the department recently dismissed over a dozen employees who were involved in criminal cases against Trump.


Post-2024 presidential election, Cleta Mitchell, an attorney with ties to Trump, called for significant changes, suggesting that “every lawyer in the voting section, and likely those in the Civil Rights Division should be terminated.” This division was created by Congress in 1957 to ensure the enforcement of federal civil rights laws.


“These are left-leaning activists who should be sent back to their leftwing organizations,” Mitchell commented in a social media post back in November.


Legal scholars contend that certain protections exist to prevent the dismissal of department employees without just cause.


“Demanding staff dismissals based on disagreement with legal interpretations or enforcement strategies is equivalent to instructing individuals to violate the law, and should be addressed with equal seriousness as any criminal act,” stated Justin Levitt, who served as an attorney in the department and was a senior policy advisor during Biden’s term.


Experts focusing on voting rights have noted that the ideas presented in Project 2025 reflect a misapprehension of the law and the operational structure of the department. They asserted that adopting the report’s perspective could lead to diminished enforcement of federal civil rights and voting legislation, potentially prompting experienced department personnel to resign.


The Legal Defense Fund published a report opposing Bondi’s nomination, pointing to her efforts to undermine essential protections for marginalized communities. They referenced her role in crafting a Florida law that mandates a five-year wait for formerly incarcerated individuals wishing to restore their voting rights, along with a legal challenge in Georgia last year regarding an official’s ability to certify election results.


Additionally, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights expressed its opposition to Bondi’s nomination in a letter to senators, arguing that her involvement in and endorsement of Trump’s actions to overturn the 2020 election should be enough to disqualify her.


An early indicator of how the department may address voting rights is emerging through a lawsuit concerning the ability of private citizens to file lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Most specialists anticipate that courts will likely uphold established legal precedents, even if the new administration alters its stance, though such shifts could project a discouraging message overall.


“This creates the impression that legal positions are easily changeable depending on the administration, which poses long-term challenges,” said John Powers, who previously operated as a senior analyst in the department’s civil rights division and later acted as counsel to the assistant attorney general of that division.