Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump Administration’s Record-Breaking Level of Personnel Turnover

Opinion

President Trump standing outside.

U.S. President Donald Trump answers questions from the media after the firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson before departing from the White House on March 13, 2018 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Mark Wilson

As Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi have learned, in Donald Trump’s world, loyalty to him is seldom reciprocated. They are just the latest in a string of people he has fired over the course of his two terms in office.

It is not surprising that someone who became famous for the use of the phrase “You’re fired” in his stint as a reality TV star would be quick to give the axe to anyone who displeases him. This is part of the reason his first administration set modern records for personnel turnover, and his second may break those records.


The people he lets go are not the only ones to pay the price. Trump’s readiness to throw anyone under the bus damages democracy by showing that loyalty to him and ruthlessness, efficiency in carrying out his agenda matter more to him than service to the people.

Democracy requires the kind of competency that the president does not seem to value. As Prof. Rosa Brooks explains, “A shared notion of competence is essential to democracy.” The kind of competency that democracy demands, she says, “Encompass(es) not only skill and efficacy but also judgment, humility and empathy.”

And if personnel decisions are also an indicator of the quality of a president’s judgment, Trump has failed mightily. His failure is especially telling because the president regularly boasts that he hires and appoints only “top, top people” who are “the best and most serious people.”

This boast was echoed on November 21, 2024, when the then President-elect announced Bondi’s appointment with great fanfare, lauding her experience and success in making “the streets safe for Florida Families.” In typical Trumpian fashion, he said that she “did such an incredible job” in reducing drug trafficking.

“I have known Pam for many years,” he added. “She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!”

Nine days earlier, he described Kristi Noemhas as “very strong on Border Security….I have known Kristi for years, and have worked with her on a wide variety of projects. She will be a great part of our mission to Make America Safe Again.”

In both cases, the claim that he had known his appointees for years makes his decision to let them go less than two years after he selected them even more of an indication, as the Washington Post put it, that “he has made a mockery of… (his) pledge…” to appoint only the best people.

Looking back at his first term, the Post notes that, “One of the people Trump hired for the White House was working as a foreign agent while advising him during the election. His campaign chairman caught the Justice Department’s attention for similarly surreptitious work. And a third campaign adviser was reportedly surveilled by the FBI as part of an investigation into whether or not he was a Russian spy. The tales of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and Carter Page… have…raised persistent questions about his judgment.”

In addition, the president has treated the people he terminates with cold, cavalier indifference. Recall that he fired former FBI Director James Comey while Comey was in Los Angeles at a speaking engagement. Then he took to Twitter to denounce him and congratulated himself on doing “a great service to the people in firing him. Good Instincts.”

In June 2019, Trump’s “good instincts” led him to nominate James Esper as Secretary of Defense. At Esper’s swearing-in ceremony, the president said, “There is no one more qualified to lead the Department of Defense than Mark Esper….“I am confident that he will be an outstanding Secretary of Defense. I have absolutely no doubt about it. He is outstanding in every way. And we’re honored to have you aboard.”

Seventeen months later, in November 2020, he fired Esper, tweeting, "Mark Esper has been terminated. I would like to thank him for his service." He did so even though, as NPR reported, “Esper earned the derogatory nickname ‘Yesper’ for seemingly acquiescing or remaining silent…” no matter what outrageous thing the president did.

Trump wanted to fire Esper months earlier after the Defense Secretary did not deploy regular military forces to quell riots in the wake of the murder of George Floyd. But by the time Trump got around to firing Esper, the Defense Secretary had plenty of company.

A Brookings Institution study released in January 2021 found that “turnover among the most influential positions within the executive office of the president” was higher in Trump’s first term than it had been in the first term of any other president going back to 1980. The same was true for members of President Trump’s first-term Cabinet. Fourteen people left the Cabinet. The next highest were the eight people who left the Cabinet in President George H.W. Bush’s first term.

The pace of churn has not slowed since he returned to the Oval Office. Time.com identifies seven senior officials that the president has already removed, including Bondi and Noem.

Time reminds us that the first was Mike Waltz, his National Security Advisor, whom the president fired in May 2025. “Waltz’s ouster came weeks after…a bombshell report that he had organized a group chat on the encrypted messaging app Signal to coordinate a sensitive military operation against Houthi militants in Yemen.”

Last May, Cameron Hamilton was also removed from his position as the acting head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, “After he broke with the Administration by testifying to members of Congress that he did not approve of dismantling the agency.”

But it turns out that as much as Trump seems ready to fire people, he does not like to do it in person. So, he typically uses intermediaries or relies on social media.

He fired Reince Priebus, his first chief of staff, by a tweet as he was waiting on the tarmac for Trump to get off Air Force One. Trump used the same medium to let Rex Tillerson, Secretary of State in his first administration, know that his services were no longer needed.

In Bondi’s case, the president broke the pattern, delivering the news as the two of them rode together in a limousine so they could attend the oral argument in the birthright citizenship case at the Supreme Court. Not only was this an awkward place to fire her, but as the Daily Beast observes, he did so “brutally,” saying only, “I think it’s time.”

Capturing the cruelty of the moment, it adds, “Even after she was fired in the limousine, she begged to stay….(and) was forced to enter the Supreme Court knowing her time was up.”

This time, he showed a graciousness toward Bondi that has often been sorely lacking in his remarks about others he fired or who left the government. According to NPR, he called her a “Great American Patriot and a loyal friend” in a Truth Social post. He praised her for doing “a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our Country…. (and added) We love Pam….”

Small consolation.

As Trump once admitted, "I consider firing everybody. At some point, that's what happens." America’s democracy would be better served if he spent less time considering firing people and more time finding people whom he would never have to think about firing.

Brooks rightly notes that “Democracy… is unsustainable without competence at every level. We need citizens who understand our political system and who are capable of evaluating competing arguments, and we need leaders capable of developing and carrying out wise policies.” Those who have left the administration, as well as many who remain, have not shown themselves capable of doing so, and the American people are worse off because of it.


Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College.


Read More

Fire Pete Hegseth to help GOP in midterms

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks during a meeting with Australia's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defense Richard Marles at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 2, 2026.

(Kent Nishimura/AFP via Getty Images/TCA)

Fire Pete Hegseth to help GOP in midterms

“Muscles, dudes in dresses, testosterone.”

That’s how one European defense official described the priorities of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to a bombshell new report from CNN on the growing concern inside the U.S. military over Hegseth’s leadership.

Keep ReadingShow less
THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: When Abuse of Power Pushes Communities Out of the American Story

An opinion essay traces America's cycle of welcoming immigrants and communities of color for labor, then excluding them once they gain power.

Westend61/Getty Images

THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: When Abuse of Power Pushes Communities Out of the American Story

The politics of exclusion is the deliberate use of power to push certain communities out of the American story through fear, cruelty, erasure, and unequal treatment. It is what happens when leaders abandon constitutional ideals and replace them with grievance, retaliation, and division.

The late John McCain warned that we weaken our greatness when we confuse patriotism with tribalism. Liz Cheney cautioned that no one should support a leader who uses fear and division to hold onto power. Adam Kinzinger called it authoritarianism. Mitt Romney said plainly, “He has caused fear and division.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez observed that “the cruelty is the point,” and the late John Lewis reminded us that “democracy is not a state; it is an act.” Together, these voices describe the elephant in the room. America is confronting a pattern bigger than corruption and bigger than authoritarian drift. It is the social, racial, and moral dimension of democratic erosion — lying, cheating, cruelty, intimidation, erasure, and exclusion masquerading as patriotism.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump and Carney standing next to American flag

U.S. President Donald Trump welcomes Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to the White House on Oct. 7, 2025 in Washington, D.C.

(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/TCA)

Trump’s war on Canada a pitiful own goal

This summer, America played host to one of the biggest international events on the planet, the World Cup, drawing millions of foreigners to our cities and towns, our stadiums and our national parks, where many of them had never been before.

The consensus was, America is awesome — visitors from Bolivia, Scotland, Uzbekistan, and everywhere in between marveled at the sheer size of our great nation, the diversity of our topography, the deliciousness of our foodstuffs, and, perhaps most importantly, the kindness of our people. (Not to mention, our eighth wonder of the world — Buc-ee’s.)

Keep ReadingShow less
The Sleeping Giant Woke Up. Trump is Asleep.

U.S. Marines wait for the arrival of U.S. President Donald Trump before a Freedom 250 Grand Prix showcase on West Executive Avenue between the West Wing of the White House and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on July 13, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The Sleeping Giant Woke Up. Trump is Asleep.

After Senator Lindsey Graham died in office, South Carolina’s governor appointed his sister, Darline Graham, to serve out the remainder of his term. Just over a month later, campaigning for a full term of her own, when asked at a debate whether Taiwan and the South China Sea are national security issues for the United States, she said she was “not that informed on national security.” The President has endorsed her candidacy. Call me old-fashioned, but I want a Congress that is informed on national security. The founding fathers seemed to agree: Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution hands Congress the power to declare war, “raise and support Armies,” “provide and maintain a Navy,” and “make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” That’s the job description, and I want a president who doesn’t endorse someone for that job who can’t handle that responsibility.

Our Commander-in-Chief and Secretary of Defense have turned away from Taiwan and the South China Sea. When I was a Navy pilot, the spoken and unspoken adversary of our future was China. I don’t mean to make a judgment about whether that was the right call, but just to say that in my 14 years affiliated with the Navy, of every potential adversary we discussed, China was always the most formidable. As I trained to be a mission commander, most of the simulations I flew and the scenarios I hashed out on oral boards revolved around the South China Sea. That’s the fight we trained to fight. Then, a few months after I separated from the Navy, Secretary Hegseth announced our priorities were shifting away from the Pacific to “restore U.S. military dominance in the Western Hemisphere.” That didn’t stop us from starting a war with Iran we can’t seem to get out of, but the promise to take focus away from the Pacific does seem to have held.

Keep ReadingShow less