The move was quickly labeled the “midnight massacre.” Late on a Friday night, in the first week of Donald Trump’s second term, the president fired 18 inspectors general without cause, sparking the first in a series of burgeoning controversies.
Among the most obvious problems with the Republican’s gambit was that it appeared to be illegal: There are specific laws in place related to how the White House can remove IGs, and in this case, Trump ignored them. But just as notable was the nature of these inspectors general’s work: These government watchdogs are responsible for investigating internal wrongdoing, possible ethical lapses, mismanagement, alleged corruption and fraud.
To fire IGs, in other words, is to open the door to abuses. (The inspector general at the U.S. Department of Agriculture was, among other things, investigating an Elon Musk startup. When she showed up for work after her ouster, deeming Trump’s move illegal, security agents escorted her from the building.)
Many of the fired IGs have filed suit, seeking reinstatement, but as the third week of Trump’s second term got underway, the president took yet another step in the same direction. NBC News reported:
The inspector general at the U.S. Agency for International Development was fired Tuesday, a day after his office released a report detailing the negative impact of the Trump administration’s dramatic downsizing of the agency, according to a letter obtained by NBC News. Paul Martin, who had been USAID’s inspector general since 2023, was notified of his dismissal by email.
The White House hasn’t commented on its motivation for dismissing Martin. But the timing suggests he was fired for the worst possible reason: He did his job; he did it well; but the White House found his work politically inconvenient.
Indeed, the day before Martin’s dismissal, his office issued a report that provided accurate information to officials and the public, shining a light on the consequences of recent USAID personnel and spending cuts.
To date, no one has argued that the report from the inspector general’s office was mistaken. By all appearances, however, the accuracy of the document and its findings were irrelevant: Martin told the truth, and his reward was an email that said his services were no longer needed.
Time will tell whether this latest legally dubious White House move generates another court fight, but in the meantime, it’s worth shifting attention to an institution that has some relevance in this story: The United States Congress.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is known in large part for his work championing the interests of inspectors general. With this in mind, after the president’s initial firing of 18 IGs, the Iowan and Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois wrote a joint letter to Trump on Jan. 28.
“We write to you today concerning the reported firing of Inspectors General (IGs) from 18 offices,” the senators’ correspondence began. “Congress was not provided the legally required 30-day notice and case-specific reasons for removal, as required by law. Accordingly, we request that you provide that information immediately.”
I spoke directly to Grassley’s office — just hours before the public learned about the White House firing the USAID inspector general — and the senator’s office confirmed that the president and his team have not responded to the senators’ request for “immediate” information.
On the contrary, exactly two weeks after Grassley and Durbin contacted Trump directly about IG firings, the president decided to fire another IG without cause, effectively thumbing his nose at the senators who took some preliminary steps to stand up for the law.
What we’re left with is a president who appears to be indifferent to both legal restrictions and the concerns of lawmakers.
How will Grassley and Durbin respond? Will Grassley and Durbin respond? Watch this space.
