About a month ago, as Donald Trump’s Justice Department purged a remarkable number of officials without cause, the U.S. pardon attorney, Elizabeth Oyer, was allegedly terminated for a ridiculous reason: According to her version of events, administration officials wanted her to restore actor Mel Gibson’s rights to carry a gun, and when she declined, Oyer’s career came to an abrupt end.
And while the administration has denied her assertions, this week, as The New York Times reported, the story took an unexpected turn.
Senior officials at the Justice Department have claimed that executive privilege should bar a lawyer dismissed from the department from testifying to Congress about a disagreement with supervisors over restoring the gun rights of Mel Gibson, the actor and prominent supporter of President Trump. Nevertheless, Elizabeth G. Oyer, the department’s former pardon attorney, appeared before lawmakers on Monday afternoon.
“I am here because I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice,” she told Democratic lawmakers.
Among the elements that make this story interesting is the degree to which Team Trump seemed eager to pressure Oyer not to share information ahead of her appearance on Capitol Hill. Indeed, NBC News reported that her lawyer complained about the Justice Department using “security resources to intimidate” Oyer, even dispatching special deputy U.S. marshals to her home.
But stepping back, there’s a related question that might not be immediately obvious: Given the fact that there are Republican majorities on Capitol Hill, and GOP committee chairs wouldn’t dare hold oversight hearings into Justice Department abuses, who invited Oyer to talk to lawmakers about her experiences?
The answer is, two congressional Democrats — Sen. Adam Schiff of California and Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland — organized a “shadow” hearing, inviting relevant witnesses to shed fresh light on the administration’s attacks on the rule of law.
It wasn’t an official hearing, but it effectively served the purpose of one — and in this instance, the gathering generated new and important information.
It was also emblematic of new signs of life among congressional Democrats who’ve been under pressure for months to do more, and who appear to have gotten the message.
In addition to the newsworthy “shadow” hearing, Raskin and Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut launched an investigation, pressing law firms for information on the White House’s alleged “shakedowns.” Similarly, Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, launched an investigation this week into Elon Musk’s conflicts of interest.
Around the same time, Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii announced that he’s expanding his holds on White House nominees to include an additional 50 names.
All of this comes just days after Democrats appeared at “Hands Off” rallies. And forced a vote on curtailing Trump’s tariff policies. And helped Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey hold the floor for 25 hours while shining a light on the president’s countless abuses. And launched a new Social Security “war room.”
My point is not that Democratic officials are suddenly doing everything their base wants to see. They’re not. I’m also not arguing that the party’s latest efforts will magically stop Trump and his team in their tracks. They won’t.
But for those who’ve argued that it’s incumbent on Democrats to step up and do more, there’s evidence to suggest that party officials are responding.
