Two former FBI agents who helped investigate efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election sued Thursday to challenge their abrupt firings from the bureau, arguing that their terminations were “solely” due to their involvement in the probe.
The two agents, identified only as John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, accused FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi of politically retaliating against them for their work in the 2020 election case, known internally as “Arctic Frost,” despite having played brief and largely administrative roles in the investigation.
The lawsuit argues that the firings were a violation of FBI policy as well as the agents’ rights under the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. Both former agents are seeking reinstatement to the bureau, and a declaration from the court that their terminations were unlawful.
FBI AGENTS GROUP TELLS CONGRESS TO TAKE URGENT ACTION TO PROTECT AGAINST POLITICIZATION
“Political support for President Trump is not a legal or appropriate requirement for the effective performance of plaintiffs’ respective roles within the F.B.I.,” the lawsuit states. “Accordingly, perceived lack of political support for President Trump is an impermissible basis for termination of plaintiffs’ F.B.I. employment.”
According to the lawsuit, the two agents were fired last fall, within a five-day period, and shortly after, unredacted internal documents related to the Arctic Frost probe were shared with members of Congress.
FBI Director Kash Patel proceeded to “summarily” fire both agents in late October and early November, the lawsuit says, “without evidence,” and without “internal investigation, notice, or hearing” to precede their terminations.
Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment on their removals, or the new lawsuit. During House testimony Thursday, however, FBI Director Kash Patel dismissed criticism raised by Democrats about terminations within the bureau.
“There’s 36,000 people employed at this FBI,” Patel told lawmakers.
“And I reject the notion wholeheartedly that the termination of those that were weaponizing law enforcement are the only ones that can do the mission,” he added.
The lawsuit argues that the terminations run afoul of FBI policy, which states that non-probationary special agents may be removed only for cause, such as misconduct, national security concerns, or an inability to perform the essential duties or responsibilities of their roles. Both had been lauded for their work at the bureau, it notes, and had received “exemplary” performance reviews and other outside recognition.
“In Arctic Frost, as in all other investigations to which they were assigned, Plaintiffs fully adhered to DOJ policies and procedures, including applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, and executed their law enforcement duties without bias or political motives,” they said in the lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C.
BONDI SWORN IN AS ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH MISSION TO END ‘WEAPONIZATION’ OF JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Lawyers for the agents also argued the removals break with Patel’s remarks last year during his Senate confirmation hearing, in which he vowed that agents would not be fired based on case assignments, and stressed that personnel decisions “should be based on performance and adherence to the law.”
The lawsuit adds to a growing list of unlawful termination lawsuits filed by ex-FBI agents in recent months, including former agents who have argued they were removed solely for their perceived political views, or for their involvement in certain politically sensitive investigations.
Former Department of Justice officials have cited concerns that the probe or any retaliatory measures carried out as a result could have a chilling effect on the work of the FBI, including its more than 52 separate field offices.
The FBI Agents’ Association, or FBIAA, a voluntary agents’ group that represents more than 14,000 active and former special agents, sharply criticized the removals of the two special agents, saying in a statement released at the time that Patel “has disregarded the law and launched a campaign of erratic and arbitrary retribution.”
“An Agent simply being assigned to an investigation and conducting it appropriately within the law should never be grounds for termination,” the group said.
“FBI Agents deal in facts, and we urge Director Patel to do the same.”
