In the first year of President Trump’s second term, more than 5,000 Justice Department employees resigned, retired or were dismissed, producing a rapid exodus that has reshaped the post‑government job market. Many former federal prosecutors and career lawyers left in 2025 and early 2026 and have been recruited by private law firms, nonprofit litigation groups and local prosecutor’s offices, while some have moved into electoral politics. The departures have supplied outside organizations with seasoned trial lawyers and appellate specialists, even as the department loses institutional knowledge and staffing capacity. The shift is already affecting congressional testimony, litigation strategies and political campaigns.
Key takeaways
- More than 5,000 Justice Department employees left during the first year of President Trump’s second administration, a broad turnover that includes voluntary and involuntary departures.
- Former federal prosecutor Michael Romano, who left DOJ in March 2025, has testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about Jan. 6 prosecutions and now works at a private firm where he serves as a frequent congressional witness.
- The D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office reported a staffing shortfall in 2025, with then‑U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro saying the office needed roughly 90 additional prosecutors to handle its caseload.
- The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division saw significant departures over the past 12 months; one notable exit, Sydney Foster, argued more than 30 federal appellate cases for the government before joining a nonprofit legal group.
- Private and nonprofit employers — including boutique firms and litigation groups — have hired former DOJ lawyers such as Greg Rosen, Mary Dohrmann and James Pearce, strengthening outside challengers to administration policies.
- Some alumni have opened practices (e.g., Joe Thompson in Minnesota) or launched firms (former special counsel Jack Smith in January with Timothy Heaphy, David Harbach and Thomas Windom), while others have entered electoral politics.
- Two former DOJ prosecutors—Ryan Crosswell and J.P. Cooney—have declared runs for Congress; Cooney reported more than $200,000 raised early in his campaign.
Background
The turnover follows an aggressive personnel reshaping of the Justice Department during President Trump’s second term and public criticism from the White House of prosecutions tied to Jan. 6 and other matters. Critics inside the department say demotions, firings and pressure on career prosecutors accelerated departures, prompting waves of early retirements and resignations across litigating units. Historically, high turnover at DOJ has been concentrated in politically sensitive periods, but legal observers describe this most recent exodus as unusually large in scale.
Those losses come against a backdrop of high‑profile investigations and prosecutions tied to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, economic espionage and other federal matters. Units that handle civil rights, public integrity and national security work have been especially affected. Nonprofit litigation groups and boutique firms long seeking experienced federal trial and appellate lawyers have viewed the outflow as an opportunity to expand their rosters and take on politically significant cases.
Main event
Michael Romano — a former elite federal prosecutor who left DOJ in March 2025 — has become a visible example of the phenomenon. Romano has testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about federal investigations into the Capitol riot and now uses his prosecutorial background at a private law firm that also positions him as a congressional witness on related matters. His move mirrors dozens of other prosecutors who have shifted to private practice and nonprofit litigation work since 2025.
At least one regional prosecutor group absorbed a cohort of former DOJ staffers: several alumni joined the Arlington County (Virginia) Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office to work at the local level. In Minnesota, departures from the U.S. Attorney’s Office — in part tied to controversy over use‑of‑force incidents — produced partners who opened a boutique firm focused on white‑collar defense, international investigations, complex commercial litigation and crisis management.
Nonprofit legal organizations have also been major beneficiaries. The Washington Litigation Group, a nonprofit that challenges aspects of the Trump administration’s policies, recently added Sydney Foster, a former appellate chief who handled more than 30 federal appeals for the government. The group says Foster’s appellate experience will help it press cases challenging administration actions such as agency reorganizations and naming decisions.
Beyond private practice and nonprofits, former DOJ personnel are translating prosecutorial reputations into political capital. Ryan Crosswell, who left after a controversial DOJ decision to drop a case against former New York Mayor Eric Adams, is running for Congress in Pennsylvania with endorsements from groups that back Democratic candidates. J.P. Cooney, who worked on litigation involving former President Trump, announced a House bid in Virginia and quickly reported strong early fundraising.
Analysis & implications
The migration of career prosecutors to outside organizations strengthens legal challengers to administration policies just as the department itself is depleted of experience. Law firms and nonprofits gain immediate credibility and courtroom muscle when they hire lawyers with federal trial and appellate experience; those hires also help craft pre‑litigation strategies and shape narratives in high‑profile suits. For clients — both corporate and individual — hiring a former DOJ prosecutor signals seriousness and often yields tactical advantages in negotiations and litigation.
For the Justice Department, the talent drain poses near‑term operational risks. Vacancies and the loss of institutional knowledge can slow investigations, reduce mentorship for junior staff and complicate continuity in multi‑year prosecutions. The D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office statement that it needed about 90 additional prosecutors in 2025 illustrates how personnel shortages translate into case backlogs and prosecutorial strain.
Politically, the exodus reshapes the talent pool available to both parties. Some departing lawyers are stepping into electoral politics with law‑and‑order credentials that appeal to donors and activists; others heighten public scrutiny of the administration through high‑profile testimony or litigation. The resulting interplay between former prosecutors in the public square and the department’s shrinking bench will influence litigation outcomes and electoral debates ahead of midterm and presidential contests.
Comparison & data
| Measure | Reported figure |
|---|---|
| DOJ departures (first year, Trump 2nd term) | >5,000 employees |
| D.C. U.S. Attorney staffing gap (2025) | ~90 prosecutors needed |
| Sydney Foster appellate cases argued for government | More than 30 federal appeals |
| Early campaign funds reported by J.P. Cooney | More than $200,000 |
The table summarizes figures cited in reporting and public statements. Together they illustrate both the scale of personnel loss at DOJ and concrete examples of how individual departures have translated into outside hiring, litigation readiness and political activity. While the >5,000 figure indicates a broad staffing shift, the staffing gap and appellate experience metrics show where operational and institutional impacts are most acute.
Reactions & quotes
Former colleagues and legal observers have framed the departures as a test of democratic institutions and professional norms. Many of the ex‑DOJ attorneys who have moved outside the department describe a continuing commitment to accountability and the rule of law.
“It is an honor to speak with you today,” Romano said when testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, emphasizing his continued public engagement after leaving the department.
Michael Romano, former federal prosecutor
Greg Rosen, who left DOJ in 2025 and now works at a boutique litigation firm, framed the public testimony of former prosecutors as nonpartisan civic participation.
“That kind of engagement isn’t partisan; it’s quintessentially American,” Rosen said of former officials speaking publicly about investigations and prosecutions.
Greg Rosen, former head, DOJ Capitol Siege Section
Advocates that help ousted DOJ staff described a recruitment bonanza for outside employers and warned of long‑lasting effects on departmental memory.
“As the department loses generations of institutional knowledge it may never get back, employers on the outside are benefiting from the unmatched talent they’re snatching up,” said an advocacy group leader.
Stacey Young, founder & executive director, Justice Connection
Unconfirmed
- Specific internal directives that may have directly forced particular departures remain publicly unverified; some exits are attributed to political pressure but direct causation is not always documented.
- Full tally of which individual cases or investigations were delayed or reassigned because of staffing losses has not been independently confirmed outside department statements.
Bottom line
The large‑scale departure of Justice Department staff since March 2025 has created a clear short‑term advantage for private law firms, nonprofit litigators and local prosecutor offices that can absorb experienced federal lawyers. These outside entities gain courtroom expertise and institutional know‑how almost immediately, strengthening their ability to pursue or defend high‑stakes litigation.
For the Justice Department, the loss represents more than a personnel problem: it is a potential erosion of continuity, mentorship and capacity that could reshape federal enforcement and appellate strategy for years. Watch for continued litigation from newly fortified outside teams, more frequent congressional testimony from former DOJ officials, and a handful of former prosecutors seeking political office — all of which will keep the issue both legal and political.
Sources
- CBS News — news report summarizing departures, individual moves and interviews (primary reporting).
- U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia — official office website referenced for staffing context (federal agency).
- American Bar Association — professional association referenced for reporting on Civil Rights Division departures (professional association).