U.S. Pardon Attorney Fired By Trump Administration After Refusing To Restore Mel Gibson’s Gun Rights

Former U.S. pardon attorney Elizabeth G. Oyer was terminated on Friday for opposing the restoration of Mel Gibson’s gun rights.

Gibson, an ardent supporter of Donald Trump, lost his gun-carrying rights following a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction in 2011. Officials in the deputy attorney general’s office wanted to add Gibson’s name to the list of people set to have their gun rights restored, but Oyer refused to carry out the request.

>TRUMP APPOINTS MEL GIBSON ‘SPECIAL AMBASSADOR TO HOLLYWOOD‘

Oyer emphasized the toxic culture within the Department of Justice in a statement: “Unfortunately, experienced professionals throughout the Department are afraid to voice their opinions because dissent is being punished.”

“Decisions are being made based on relationships and loyalty, not based on facts or expertise or sound analysis, which is very alarming given that what is at stake is our public safety,” she said. 

Oyer’s spokesperson shared in a statement that Oyer had not been told the reason for her termination, leading them to believe it was in response to her act of resistance.

A Justice Department official insisted that Oyer’s termination was imminent, stating, “The Mel Gibson decision did not play a role in termination decision…The paperwork was done before the Mel Gibson email went out.”

However, another member Justice Department official supported Oyer by noting that the other official who spoke to NBC News, “Is part of a very concerning set of personnel moves across the federal government and at DOJ.”

They continued, “I don’t know how much of what happened to Liz was a failure to toe the line about a specific thing… But, systematically, the political leadership of this administration is doing their best to take away the institutional guardrails.”

Following his second inauguration, Trump has made restoring gun rights to convicted criminals a top priority, despite multiple officials’ warnings that this would endanger the public.

One official remarked, “The fact that this was the number one thing they wanted to address is bizarre.”