The U.S. Justice Department has determined that the multiple layers of removal restrictions protecting administrative law judges are unconstitutional and will no longer defend them in court, top officials announced Thursday.
Chad Mizelle, the department’s chief of staff, criticized administrative law judges—who oversee federal agency disputes—as “unelected and constitutionally unaccountable.”
In a letter to U.S. Senator Charles Grassley, which Mizelle posted on X, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris confirmed the Justice Department’s decision to stop defending these removal restrictions against legal challenges.
The policy shift aligns with President Trump and ally Elon Musk’s broader push to weaken the authority of federal regulatory agencies. It also follows a series of Supreme Court rulings that have curtailed agency power, with the Court’s conservative justices expressing skepticism toward expansive regulatory oversight.
Last year, the Supreme Court struck down the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s use of in-house administrative law judges for enforcement actions, ruling the practice unconstitutional. Critics, including conservative and business groups, have argued that the SEC gains an unfair advantage by litigating cases before its own judges.
Unlike federal judges appointed under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, administrative judges operate within the executive branch, handling cases for agencies such as the Social Security Administration, the Department of Labor, and the Drug Enforcement Administration.
