Skip to main content

March 16, 2026

DOJ suspends prosecutor experience requirement as 5,500 staff have departed

Fresh law school graduates now eligible to prosecute federal crimes

The Justice Department sent an internal memo on March 13, 2026 with the subject line "Suspension of Attorney One Year Experience Requirement," announcing that its longstanding rule requiring one year of legal practice before joining as a federal prosecutor had been suspended through February 28, 2027. The memo cited an "exigent hiring need" across the department as the reason for the change. (, )

Within days, U.S. attorneys' offices including those in Minnesota and Southern Florida posted open assistant U.S. attorney positions under the new standard, listing a law degree and active bar membership as the only mandatory qualifications.

The one-year minimum was the floor, not the standard. Many districts had previously required three or more years of legal experience before considering applicants for federal prosecutor roles. The suspension dropped that floor to zero across all U.S. attorneys' offices nationwide.

The DOJ retains authority to set its own internal hiring standards without congressional action or public comment. The experience requirement was never codified in law. It was department policy, which is why the department could suspend it with a single internal memo.

Approximately 5,500 Justice Department employees have left since the start of the Trump administration in 2025, according to , a nonprofit founded by former DOJ career attorneys that has tracked departures through public records and attorney reports. placed total departures at over 6,400 against a department workforce of roughly 108,000 at the end of 2025. The DOJ said it had hired more than 3,400 career attorneys in the same period.

The departures have been concentrated in some of the department's most complex units:

| Division / Unit | Reported Impact | |---|---| | Civil Rights Division | Over 200 left; roughly 75% of attorneys gone | | Public Integrity Section | Significantly depleted | | Counterterrorism Unit | Experienced prosecutors departed | | January 6 Prosecution Team | Multiple assigned prosecutors terminated |

More than 230 attorneys, agents, and staff were fired, apparently because of their work on assigned cases, past public criticism of Trump, or no disclosed reason. The departures include career prosecutors from the counterterrorism, public corruption, and civil rights units that handle the most sensitive federal cases.

Peter Keisler, a senior DOJ official under President George W. Bush, called the scale "completely unprecedented in both its scale and scope." Stuart Gerson, who served at DOJ under Presidents Bush and Clinton, said: "To lose people at that career level...is immensely damaging to the public interest."

Federal prosecutors handle some of the most complex criminal cases in the U.S. legal system, including drug trafficking conspiracies, public corruption, national security matters, and major financial fraud. The caseload demands command of evidentiary rules, constitutional law, and courtroom advocacy that most law school graduates don't yet have. Inexperienced prosecutors make errors that violate defendants' rights and create grounds for successful appeals that reverse convictions and require retrials. Federal courts have overturned convictions when prosecutors failed to meet evidentiary or constitutional standards. The risk of those outcomes rises directly with inexperience.

The American Bar Association doesn't set a national minimum experience standard for federal prosecutors. () The one-year floor has always been an internal DOJ policy, not a federal law. What changed on March 13, 2026 is that a standard the department built into decades of hiring practice was set aside under the pressure of mass institutional attrition. Supervisory prosecutors are supposed to mentor and oversee new hires, but staffing shortages have strained those oversight structures in many districts.

The Justice Department was established by Congress in 1870 to centralize the federal government's legal functions. For most of its history, a defining principle has been the separation between career attorneys and political appointees. The replaced the patronage system, where federal jobs were distributed as political rewards, with merit-based competitive hiring. The reinforced those protections, shielding career federal employees from dismissal based on political affiliation or their assignment to sensitive cases.

The closest historical precedent is Watergate's Saturday Night Massacre in October 1973, when President Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire special prosecutor Archibald Cox. Richardson and his deputy William Ruckelshaus both resigned rather than comply. The rank-and-file corps of career DOJ attorneys remained intact. Peter Keisler, who served as Assistant Attorney General under President George W. Bush, said the current scale of departures is "completely unprecedented in both its scale and scope" and surpasses anything in the department's 150-year history.

The department hasn't publicly disclosed how many positions remain unfilled across U.S. attorneys' offices, or what supervision standards apply to new hires who've never practiced law.

⚖️Justice🏛️Government🔐Ethics

People, bills, and sources

Pamela Bondi

Pamela Bondi

U.S. Attorney General

Donald Trump

President of the United States

Ed Martin

U.S. Attorney, District of Columbia

Peter Keisler

Former Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division (Bush administration)

Stuart Gerson

Former Acting Attorney General; former Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division (Bush and Clinton administrations)

Stacey Young

Founder and Executive Director, Justice Connection

What you can do

1

civic action

Contact your senators to demand Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on DOJ hiring standards

The Senate Judiciary Committee has direct oversight jurisdiction over the Justice Department. It can demand the DOJ disclose staffing gaps by district, explain how inexperienced prosecutors are being supervised, and account for how the experience waiver interacts with the department's expanded enforcement agenda. No public accounting of those details exists yet.

Hello, my name is [name] and I'm a constituent from [city, state]. I'm calling to urge Senator [name] to support Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the DOJ's suspension of the experience requirement for federal prosecutors. The department has lost approximately 5,500 employees since January 2025 and is now hiring law school graduates with no prior legal experience into federal prosecutor roles. Americans deserve to know how many positions are unfilled in their local U.S. attorney's office and what safeguards are in place to protect defendants' constitutional rights.

2

civic action

Ask your representative to request a public accounting of unfilled federal prosecutor positions by district

The House Judiciary Committee shares oversight of the Justice Department and can require a public report on staffing levels in each U.S. attorney's district, including how many positions are filled by attorneys hired under the experience waiver and what supervision structures apply. That information doesn't exist in any public document right now.

Hello, I'm calling from [city, state] to ask Representative [name] to request a public report from the DOJ on staffing levels in each U.S. attorney's district. The department suspended its experience requirement for new prosecutors in March 2026 but hasn't disclosed how many vacancies exist, how many positions have been filled under the waiver, or how inexperienced new hires are being supervised. My community deserves to know how fully staffed the office prosecuting federal crimes here actually is.

3

civic action

Urge your representative to introduce legislation setting minimum qualifications for federal prosecutors into statute

The one-year experience requirement was always an internal DOJ policy, not a law. The department suspended it without any congressional vote, public notice, or comment period. Legislation putting basic minimum qualifications into statute would require Congress to approve any future waiver, creating an accountability step that doesn't currently exist for either party in power.

Hello, I'm calling from [city, state] to ask Representative [name] to support legislation setting minimum qualifications for federal prosecutors in federal statute. Right now the DOJ can waive experience requirements with an internal memo and no public notice. Putting a basic standard into law would ensure that any future administration of either party can't quietly lower it without a congressional vote and a public record.