Judge rejects ex-FBI agent Strzok's claim he was illegally fired for disparaging Trump in texts
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rules the 2018 firing was based on misconduct and its impact on the FBI, not political viewpoint
A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed a claim by former FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok that he was illegally fired for disparaging President Donald Trump in text messages exchanged on an FBI-issued device. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said the firing was based on misconduct and its impact on the FBI, and not on Strzok’s political opinions.
Jackson rejected Strzok’s assertion that his First Amendment rights were violated, explaining that the FBI’s interest in avoiding the appearance of bias in ongoing investigations outweighed his desire to speak about political candidates on an official device. The judge noted that Strzok offered no evidence that the FBI treated him more harshly than others in comparable circumstances because Trump was the subject of his messages, and that the testimony of FBI officials who were deposed indicated there were no appropriate comparators. “Each of the FBI officials deposed maintained that given plaintiff’s rank and his role in the two investigations, and the appearance of bias that permeated the messages, the situation was unprecedented, and there were no comparators,” Jackson wrote.
Strzok, who helped lead FBI investigations into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server and ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia, was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team in 2017 after text exchanges with FBI lawyer Lisa Page were discovered by the Justice Department’s inspector general. The messages, written on FBI-issued cell phones, were critical of Trump during the 2016 campaign and included sharp insults. Trump has for years cited the texts to argue the FBI was biased against him, while Strzok has denied that his political views influenced his investigative decisions.
Last year, Strzok and Page settled separate claims with the Justice Department over disclosures of the texts to reporters and a related leak investigation. The pairs contended the disclosures were meant to promote a false narrative of anti-Trump bias within the FBI and to bolster the department’s standing with then-President Trump after his attacks on then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The government had sought to resolve the case without trial, arguing that Strzok’s dismissal was based on misconduct and its impact on the FBI, not political views.
The ruling underscores the legal framework governing First Amendment claims by federal employees in high-profile investigations and illustrates the challenges of proving viewpoint discrimination when an officer’s conduct intersects with sensitive, ongoing inquiries. The decision does not resolve broader disputes over institutional bias or the role of political speech by agency personnel, but it narrows avenues for similar lawsuits by others who contend they faced retaliation for their political expressions while serving in law enforcement.