Trump’s Pardons and DOJ Cuts Gut Fight Against Public Corruption, Experts Warn

President Trump’s second term has been marked by a relentless assault on the institutions designed to root out public corruption. From pardoning more than a dozen convicted officials to dismantling the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, Trump’s actions have sent a clear message: corruption among his supporters will be tolerated, if not rewarded.

A federal jury swiftly convicted former Las Vegas Councilwoman Michele Fiore of conspiracy and wire fraud for misusing donations meant for police memorials. Yet, just weeks before her sentencing, Trump granted her a pardon, effectively letting her off the hook. Fiore is one of at least 15 former elected officials or their associates who have benefited from Trump’s clemency since he returned to office in January 2025.

Dan Greenberg, senior legal fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, describes this pattern as more than just isolated pardon “mistakes.” Instead, he calls it a “hailstorm” of clemency that “appears to any reasonable person to be not just highly questionable, but just obviously disturbing.” Many pardoned officials are Republicans, raising troubling questions about political favoritism in the administration’s approach to justice.

The White House’s defense of these pardons as standard presidential prerogative falls flat against the broader context of the Trump administration’s dismantling of the Public Integrity Section—a specialized unit created after Watergate to prosecute high-level corruption cases. Once staffed by around 40 full-time prosecutors, it now operates with just two, according to current and former officials.

John Keller, former acting chief of the Public Integrity Section, resigned in protest after being ordered to drop a corruption case against then-New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Keller warns that without robust enforcement, corruption will corrode government systems, allowing officials to serve themselves rather than the public.

The fallout is especially dire for smaller states and rural areas. While large city U.S. attorney offices might handle complex corruption cases independently, the Public Integrity Section often provided critical oversight and resources in less populated regions. Its near collapse means many cases are declined or quietly dropped, eroding accountability where it is needed most.

Trump’s actions have not just weakened a key federal unit; they have normalized a culture where public corruption is overlooked or excused if it serves political loyalty. For those who care about government accountability and democratic integrity, this is a clarion call to resist the erosion of justice and demand real consequences for corrupt officials—no matter their party or connections.