Bondi Fires DOJ Paralegal After Obscene Gesture at National Guard in D.C.

Attorney General Pam Bondi abruptly terminated a Department of Justice paralegal this past Friday after she admitted to making a vulgar gesture at a National Guard member on her way to work, sparking controversy and raising questions about discipline and decorum within the agency.

The dismissed employee, Elizabeth Baxter, worked in the Environmental Defense Section under the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. She held the rank of Paralegal Specialist GS‑0950‑11, and had been stationed in the same building where another DOJ paralegal—Sean Charles Dunn—was recently dismissed for a separate incident involving a thrown sandwich and verbal confrontation with federal officers.

---

The Incident and Admission

Bondi’s action followed an internal investigation into Baxter’s behavior. According to the termination memo, Baxter told a DOJ security guard that she had just made the offensive gesture toward a National Guard member outside Metro Center on August 18, declaring, “F—k the National Guard.” Soon afterward, security camera footage captured her again raising her middle finger and shouting, “F—k you,” toward a Guardsman near the DOJ’s 4CON building in the NoMa district.

A week after that incident, Baxter repeated the sentiment, telling a security guard she “hated the Guard” and had told them to “F—k off!” The memo cited multiple witness statements and surveillance video as evidence of repeated misconduct.

Bondi’s termination letter to Baxter was direct and decisive: “You are removed from your position … and from the federal service, effective immediately,” it stated.

---

Bondi’s Justification and Messaging

Bondi defended the termination publicly, emphasizing that federal employees who “disrespect law enforcement” will not be tolerated within the Department of Justice under her leadership. She made clear that her decision was rooted in maintaining discipline and supporting the mission of the DOJ.

Her messaging carried a political tone, aligning firmly with the broader administration’s law-and-order priorities. She framed the action as part of her commitment to defending President Donald Trump’s agenda and making America safer. In her view, even if one opposes the mission, disrespecting those in uniform is a line that can’t be crossed.

Bondi has already made headlines for other recent firings at the DOJ. Earlier in August, the agency dismissed Dunn after he allegedly hurled a Subway sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection officer and shouted at federal agents. A grand jury declined to indict Dunn on felony charges but he was later charged with a misdemeanor.

---

Pattern of Personnel Discipline

Baxter’s case falls amid a wave of controversy over conduct and staffing decisions at the DOJ. The high-profile nature of her dismissal, tied directly to actions against uniformed personnel in the nation’s capital, has elevated public scrutiny of internal discipline procedures in the department.

Observers note the swiftness with which Bondi acted. The alleged offense, the subsequent admission, and the termination all occurred in close succession, indicating a low tolerance for behavior she viewed as undermining authority or disrespecting the federal security presence in Washington.

Bondi appears intent on signaling that even career civil servants—not just political appointees—are held accountable for behavior deemed incompatible with department standards.

---

The Broader Context in D.C.

The timing of this episode is significant. The gesture occurred while National Guard troops were deployed in Washington under an expanded federal crime initiative. The presence of these troops in the city has itself been controversial, with critics accusing the administration of federalizing policing and deploying troops as a political show of force.

That Baxter’s conduct was directly aimed at members of the Guard during this period gave her actions extra weight and heightened sensitivity. It was not merely an offhand insult—it came in a charged environment where federal authority, security, and public order were already under intense debate.

---

Fallout and Questions Ahead

Baxter’s dismissal raises several important questions:

1. Due process and standard enforcement — How consistently are rules applied to paralegals and lower-level staff? Is the response proportionate?

2. Free speech boundaries — As a federal employee, does she retain First Amendment protections in off-duty conduct, or does her position curtail that right?

3. Political overtones — Given the political context in D.C. and how closely the dismissal aligns with law-and-order messaging, critics may argue the case is as much symbolic as disciplinary.

4. Precedent and morale — What message does this send across DOJ ranks? Will others feel constrained in expressing dissent, even privately?

Regardless, this incident stands out. It pits internal department discipline against political optics, free speech vs. professional responsibility, and personal conduct against public symbolism. Whether Baxter’s termination becomes a footnote or an inflection point may depend on how DOJ handles discipline and transparency moving forward.

For now, the image of a federal paralegal flipping off a National Guard member—and being swiftly removed for it—has become a stark, unusual chapter in the DOJ’s internal history.