A new spate of Justice Department officials quit because their section didn't want to probe Renee Good's shooting
www.ms.now
At least six leaders of the Civil Rights Division resigned because the section's head, Harmeet Dhillon, decided not to investigate shooting of Renee Good.

At least four leaders of the Civil Rights Division resigned because the section’s head, Harmeet Dhillon, decided not to investigate shooting of Renee Good.

Top leaders of the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division have left their jobs to register their frustration with the department after the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon decided not to investigate the ICE officer’s fatal shooting of Renee Good last week.

The criminal section of the division would normally investigate any fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer and specializes in probing potential or alleged abuse or improper use of force by law enforcement.

The departures – including that of the chief of the section, as well as the principal deputy chief, deputy chief and acting deputy chief – represent the most significant mass resignation at the Justice Department since February. At that time, five leaders and supervisors of the department’s Public Integrity Section, which investigates public officials for possible corruption, resigned rather than comply with an appointee of Donald Trump’s orders to dismiss the bribery case against then-New York mayor Eric Adams.

  • big_slap@lemmy.world
    71·
    1 day ago

    to clarify my statement: in my opinion, the wheels of justice are turning too slowly for a president that wakes up, waves a wand, and gets what he wants. his actions have real consequences for real Americans.

    just last week, 10 billion dollars for child care was halted for states that are not republican. the effects malnourished children have every day they go hungry may last a lifetime… and im just supposed to wait for the litigation you posted to get things sorted out? unacceptable.

    I have no doubt the law is accurately tracking and will get things done, but the wait doesnt work for people that depend on social services

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      6·
      1 day ago

      Well, yes. I agree on that. But it’s what we have. And it’s exactly why they move fast and break things.

      They’re hoping to demoralize the American public to get further power.

      • big_slap@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 day ago

        I agree it is what we have as well, but there has got to be a better faster way to clean this mess up that isn’t violent.

        demoralization is working too, and its the only thing I have 100% control of, but I just cant give in.

        im sure everyone’s social circle thats reading this has at least one person they know who only works to divide minds instead of unite them, and its absolutely draining.

        OK im off my soapbox for awhile, thanks for the conversation… I feel better lol

    • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      21 hours ago

      You’re proving the point that the courts work: just after DHHS blocked TANF funds to five Democratic states, a judge blocked it with a TRO:

      A federal judge in New York temporarily blocked the Trump administration from freezing roughly $10 billion in federal funding for child care and social services destined for five Democratic-led states, keeping funds flowing until a lawsuit against the government can progress. . . . The decision came less than a day after the five states targeted by the Trump administration — New York, California, Minnesota, Illinois and Colorado — filed a lawsuit arguing that the freeze could create havoc among families with young children.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/09/us/politics/trump-child-care-funding-freeze.html

      Outside SCOTUS the courts are holding, and moving quickly where warranted. You could easily have linked this information yourself, but chose not to. Stop spreading misinformation.

      • big_slap@lemmy.world
        11·
        20 hours ago

        You could easily have linked this information yourself, but chose not to. Stop spreading misinformation.

        ?

        I didnt choose not to post a link, do not make invalid assumptions when you know nothing about me.

        • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          15 hours ago

          It’s not an invalid assumption, it’s fact that you included only doomer, outdated news in order to support your wrong conclusion either a) without bothering to check to see if your information was correct, or b) you knew but decided not to mention it.

          If you don’t like false accusations then don’t make them. I know that I have zero respect for that approach to posting, and between that and the lazy doomering that’s enough of you for me to know. Blocked, bye.