REUTERS / Jonathan Ernst
- The Justice Department has “systemic” problems with how it addresses sexual misconduct complaints made by its own employees, the department’s inspector general has found.
- Many alleged perpetrators have received little punishment, maintained their rank and pay without any suspension, and some were later given performance awards.
- Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has created a working group to address the IG’s report.
The Justice Department has serious and pervasive problems with how it addresses sexual misconduct complaints made by its own employees, the department’s inspector general found in a recent report obtained by The Washington Post through Freedom of Information Act requests.
Among DOJ employees determined to have behaved improperly, many received little punishment, maintaining their rank and pay without any suspension, and some even later received performance awards. In his report, the IG found that complaints about sexual harassment, in many cases perpetrated by high-ranking officials, have increased over the last five years, have been consistently mishandled across the country, and require “high level action.”
“We’re talking about presidential appointees, political appointees, FBI special agents in charge, U.S. attorneys, wardens, a chief deputy U.S. marshal, a U.S. marshal assistant director, a deputy assistant attorney general,” Michael Horowitz, DOJ’s Inspector General, told The Post.
In one case, Victor Lawrence, a senior attorney in the Office of Immigration Litigation, groped the breasts and buttocks of two female attorneys and made inappropriate sexual comments to them during an office happy hour. This came after he was previously reprimanded for sending sexual emails to colleagues.
Lawrence was eventually reassigned to a different division, which the IG found was given “no notice” of his misconduct, and later given a performance award. He wasn’t disciplined with any drop in pay or title.
Another supervisory attorney in the immigration division, Theodore Atkinson, received a written reprimand, a demotion in title, and was prohibited from entering a DOJ building after he stalked a female attorney, hacked into her personal email, and conducted “a catfishing operation” by creating a fake online profile to “entice” her.
Atkinson was moved to a different department within the Civil Division, but was never suspended, did not have his pay or grade reduced, and recently received a “special commendation” award. Atkinson’s name was redacted in the version of the report that The Post received, but he was named by sources who spoke with The Post.
Horowitz wrote that Atkinson’s case “raises potential criminal concerns, yet we found no evidence that a referral was made to [the Inspector General] or any other law enforcement entity.”
Yet another unnamed top attorney still working in the Office of Immigration Litigation allegedly “peered” through windows into offices in which two different female colleagues were privately pumping breast milk. Women in the office have reportedly taped wrapping paper to the inside of their windows to prevent him from looking in.
While this man was also given a performance award following his alleged misconduct, a DOJ official recently announced that the Civil Division no longer allows employees under investigation for, or shortly after, credible wrongdoing to be awarded.
“I’m shocked and really disappointed,” a female attorney with knowledge of the incidents told The Post. “They got free passes. They got awards. They got to continue with their careers. It sounds like nothing is going to be done.”
Horowitz called the department’s mishandling of sexual misconduct allegations “systemic.”
“Without strong action from the Department to ensure that DOJ employees meet the highest standards of conduct and accountability, the systemic issues we identified in our work may continue,” Horowitz wrote in a May 31 memo to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
A DOJ spokesman told the Post that Rosenstein has created a working group to address the IG’s report and will respond to the IG with recommendations. The IG’s office can investigate the issue, but cannot determine the disciplinary measures taken.
