Elizabeth Baxter, a paralegal at the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, found herself at the center of a political and cultural firestorm this August after a string of confrontations with National Guard members deployed to Washington, DC. Her swift termination by Attorney General Pam Bondi has ignited debate about workplace conduct, respect for law enforcement, and the broader political climate in the nation’s capital.
On the morning of August 18, 2025, Baxter arrived at the DOJ’s 4CON building in the NoMa district of Washington, DC, at precisely 8:21 a.m. According to The Economic Times and The New York Post, she reportedly boasted to a DOJ security guard that she had just made an obscene gesture to a guardsman at the Metro Center Metro Stop, declaring, “F–k the National Guard.” Later that same day, at around 12:18 p.m., security cameras captured Baxter putting up her middle finger toward National Guard personnel and shouting, “F–k you!” The incident didn’t end there. Just a week later, on August 25, Baxter again told a DOJ security guard that she hated the National Guard and told them to “F–k off!” as reported by Reuters and Hindustan Times.
The repeated nature of these actions prompted Attorney General Pam Bondi to take decisive action. In a memo first obtained by The New York Post, Bondi wrote, “Based on your inappropriate conduct towards National Guard service members, your employment with the Department of Justice is hereby terminated, and you are removed from federal service effective immediately.” On social media, Bondi was even more direct, stating, “Today, I took action to terminate a DOJ employee for inappropriate conduct towards National Guard service members in DC. This DOJ remains committed to defending President Trump’s agenda and fighting to make America safe again. If you oppose our mission and disrespect law enforcement — you will NO LONGER work at DOJ.”
The Justice Department’s spokesperson, Gates McGavick, reinforced Bondi’s stance. Posting on X, he said, “If you don’t support law enforcement, [Bondi’s] DOJ might not be a good fit.” The message was clear: disrespect toward law enforcement, especially in such a public and repeated fashion, would not be tolerated under this administration.
Baxter’s firing was not an isolated event. Just weeks earlier, another DOJ employee, Sean Dunn, was dismissed following a similarly publicized incident. On August 10, Dunn, who worked in the criminal division’s international affairs section in the same 4CON building, was arrested after shouting abuse at federal authorities deployed to DC and throwing a salami sandwich at one of them. According to The Economic Times, Dunn allegedly yelled, “F—k you! You f—king fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!” before launching his sandwich at a federal officer. After a grand jury failed to indict him on felony assault charges, prosecutors charged Dunn with misdemeanor assault, a lesser offense that carries a potential sentence of up to one year in jail.
Attorney General Bondi’s response to Dunn’s actions was as uncompromising as her response to Baxter. “This is an example of the Deep State we have been up against for seven months as we work to refocus DOJ,” she tweeted after Dunn’s firing. “You will NOT work in this administration while disrespecting our government and law enforcement.”
These firings come at a time of heightened tension in the capital. In August 2025, President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of hundreds of National Guard members to Washington, DC, declaring a crime emergency and announcing a temporary federal takeover of the city’s police department. Trump claimed that DC would soon be a “CRIME FREE ZONE, in only 14 days, far faster than scheduled,” as reported by Reuters. The move drew sharp criticism from Democrats and local officials, who argued that the deployment was heavy-handed, politically motivated, and unfairly targeted minority communities. Nevertheless, Trump and his allies pointed to a drop in reported crime as evidence of the operation’s success.
The deployment also included agents from multiple federal agencies, including the FBI, to patrol the city’s streets. After a legal challenge by the city’s attorney general, the Trump administration struck a deal with DC Mayor Muriel Bowser to keep Police Chief Pamela Smith in charge of the department’s day-to-day operations. Still, the presence of National Guard troops and federal agents remained a contentious issue, with some residents expressing resentment or outright hostility toward the increased federal presence.
Against this backdrop, the actions of Baxter and Dunn have been seized upon by both sides of the political spectrum. Supporters of Bondi and the Trump administration argue that the firings demonstrate a zero-tolerance policy for disrespect toward law enforcement and a commitment to restoring order in the capital. As Bondi herself said, “If you oppose our mission and disrespect law enforcement — you will NO LONGER work at DOJ.”
Critics, however, see the dismissals as evidence of a broader crackdown on dissent within the federal workforce. Some argue that the firings send a chilling message to employees who may object to administration policies or the presence of federal troops in their city. They point out that while the conduct of Baxter and Dunn was clearly inappropriate, the highly publicized nature of their terminations appears designed to reinforce loyalty to the administration’s law-and-order agenda.
The controversy is further complicated by the political context. President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to DC is part of a broader strategy to portray the capital as beset by crime and in need of federal intervention. Yet, as Reuters notes, Justice Department data shows that violent crime in Washington, DC, actually hit a 30-year low last year. This disconnect between political rhetoric and statistical reality has fueled debate over the necessity and effectiveness of the federal response.
For many in Washington, the firings of Elizabeth Baxter and Sean Dunn are a microcosm of the larger national debate over policing, protest, and the limits of dissent. While few would defend the explicit language and gestures directed at National Guard members, the question remains: where should the line be drawn between personal expression and professional conduct, especially in an era of intense political polarization?
As the dust settles, one thing is clear — under Attorney General Pam Bondi, the Justice Department is drawing that line firmly in defense of law enforcement. Employees who cross it, intentionally or not, are finding themselves out of a job and at the center of a national conversation about respect, authority, and the right to protest.
