Trump pardons, DOJ moves hurt fight against public corruption : NPR

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-05-13 04:00:00 — www.npr.org

In 2024, a federal jury found former Las Vegas councilwoman Michele Fiore guilty of misappropriating approximately $70,000 in donations intended for a memorial for police officers killed in the line of duty. Instead, she used the funds for personal expenses, including rent and her daughter’s wedding. Just weeks before her scheduled sentencing in May 2025, President Trump granted her a full, unconditional pardon. Fiore is among at least 15 former elected officials and their associates who have been pardoned by Trump since he returned to office.

Legal experts argue that these pardons reflect a broader trend within the Trump administration that undermines the fight against public corruption. Dan Greenberg, a senior legal fellow at the Cato Institute, noted that the administration’s actions suggest an increasingly casual attitude toward public corruption, with pardons being a significant part of that trend. Additionally, the dismantling of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, established post-Watergate to combat corruption, has further weakened enforcement efforts. Columbia Law School professor Richard Briffault emphasized that the administration’s actions convey a lack of seriousness regarding corruption, indicating a disdain for the issue and a belief that those convicted of corruption were treated unfairly.

Trump’s second term has seen a surge in pardons, including around 1,500 granted on his first day in office for individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol riots. Among the pardoned were a Virginia sheriff convicted of accepting $75,000 in bribes and the former speaker of the Tennessee state house, who was involved in a kickback scheme. While some pardons were granted to Democrats, such as former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, more than half of those related to public corruption were awarded to Republicans or Trump supporters. A top official involved in the pardon process, Ed Martin, remarked on social media, “No MAGA left behind.”

Greenberg compared the controversial pardons to a “hailstorm,” suggesting that the sheer volume and nature of these pardons are not just questionable but disturbing. In defense of Trump’s actions, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson stated that he has exercised his constitutional authority to issue pardons for individuals who have been victims of what she described as Biden’s “weaponized justice system.” She also criticized Biden’s pardons, labeling him “President Autopen” for allegedly signing pardons for violent criminals and family members.

The impact of these pardons extends to the Justice Department, where John Keller, a former chief of the Public Integrity Section, noted a chilling effect on prosecutors. Following Trump’s 2024 election victory, many prosecutors hesitated to pursue public corruption cases that might be unpopular with the administration. Keller highlighted that the Public Integrity Section, which once had around 40 full-time staff, has been reduced to just two attorneys, significantly limiting its ability to investigate and prosecute corruption cases. The number of open matters handled by the section has dropped from approximately 175-200 to around 20.

Experts warn that this decline in enforcement could lead to a long-term “corroding effect” on public integrity, resulting in a government where officials prioritize personal gain over public service. Keller pointed to a specific case involving a former Pennsylvania police officer convicted of bribery and sexual misconduct, emphasizing that without the Public Integrity Section, such cases are unlikely to be prosecuted.

How this sits against verifiable accuracy
The excerpt indicates that Trump has granted numerous pardons, including to individuals convicted of corruption, which aligns with the broader narrative of his administration’s approach to public integrity. Legal experts cited in the excerpt express concern that these actions reflect a casual attitude toward corruption and a dismantling of enforcement mechanisms. The White House’s defense of Trump’s pardons as a constitutional exercise contrasts sharply with the criticisms from legal experts, who argue that the pardons undermine the integrity of public office and the rule of law.

What the excerpt shows about verifiable lies
No verifiable lies are presented in the excerpt.

Targets and tone
The excerpt does not show Trump singling out, insulting, demeaning, threatening, or speaking in a hostile way about specific people or groups.

In summary, the pardons issued by Trump, particularly those related to public corruption, raise significant concerns about the administration’s commitment to combating corruption and maintaining the integrity of public office. The reduction of resources within the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section further complicates efforts to hold corrupt officials accountable, potentially leading to a long-term erosion of public trust in government institutions.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/05/13/g-s1-121485/trump-pardons-public-corruption-justice