Federal Judges Reject DOJ Presumption of Regularity Over Misconduct

Federal judges are increasingly rejecting the presumption of regularity, a long-standing legal principle that assumes the government acts in good faith. This shift follows allegations of misconduct and misrepresentations by lawyers from the United States Department of Justice, which judges describe as having eroded the department's historical credibility.

The decline in judicial trust coincides with a restructuring of the department under the administration of Donald Trump. This process involved the departure of hundreds of career attorneys and the appointment of officials based on loyalty to the president, which judges link to a decrease in the quality of court filings and a loss of the department's record in high-profile prosecutions.

Recent rulings have explicitly stripped the government of this trust. Judge Paula Xinis ruled that the government destroyed the presumption of regularity in a case involving the illegal deportation of a Maryland resident. Similarly, Judge Mary S. McElroy stated that the government has proven unworthy of judicial trust, citing a discrepancy between expected honorable conduct and the tactics used by federal prosecutors.