What was he thinking?
Former FBI agent Peter Strzok has lost a long-running lawsuit claiming he was illegally fired during Donald Trump’s first term after sending text messages that criticized Trump.
Strzok argued in the lawsuit that his FBI bosses had retaliated against him in order to placate Trump, who was outraged over texts that Strzok exchanged while investigating ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.
In a ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said that, after several years gathering evidence and testimony from those involved in the 2018 decision to terminate the veteran counterintelligence agent, Strzok’s lawyers had failed to show that his dismissal violated his First Amendment rights.
Jackson, an Obama appointee, stressed that she was not ruling on whether Strzok’s firing “was the appropriate sanction” for his conduct, only that the voluminous evidence assembled over years of litigation — including a deposition of Trump himself — had not proven Strzok’s rights were violated.
Jackson’s full ruling is under seal, for now. But she disclosed a summary Tuesday that showed she also rejected Strzok’s argument that he had struck a binding deal with a top FBI disciplinary official under which Strzok would have been demoted and suspended for 60 days. The FBI’s deputy director at the time, David Bowdich, nixed that arrangement and fired Strzok.
Strzok, who worked as an agent for the FBI for 22 years before his firing, can appeal Jackson’s decision to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. His attorney, Aitan Goelman, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The ruling ends one chapter in one of the lengthiest legal sagas stemming from Trump’s first term, when he grew increasingly furious over the criminal and counterintelligence probes of his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Russia. The discovery of the anti-Trump text messages — including one in which Strzok suggested the FBI might “stop” Trump from becoming president — helped Trump cast those probes as a corrupt “witch hunt” and embroil the bureau in years of controversy.
The imbroglio became tabloid fodder, as well, after it was revealed that Strzok and the FBI lawyer with whom he exchanged many of the texts, Lisa Page, were having an affair at the time. Trump seized on that aspect of the story and mounted numerous attacks on Strzok and Page on social media and in public, sometimes disparaging Page in crude terms.
Strzok has long denied that his personal views about Trump influenced his actions on the job, and a lengthy inspector general review found no evidence that the Russia probe was affected by bias. But the saga helped Trump rally his supporters and regain his footing after a rocky start to his presidency.
In 2019, Strzok and Page filed separate lawsuits over the episode. Page, who quit the FBI in 2018, claimed that the Justice Department’s disclosure of her text messages to reporters violated the Privacy Act. Strzok’s suit made similar claims but also challenged his firing.
Last year, during the Biden administration, the Justice Department agreed to pay Page $800,000 to settle her suit and to pay Strzok $1.2 million to settle his privacy-invasion claims. Strzok’s claims related to his firing were not part of the settlement.
FBI Director Kash Patel, a longtime Trump loyalist, recently faced questions from Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) about the settlements paid to Strzok and Page, with demands that Patel identify the FBI officials who authorized them. Patel said the agreements were “reached in the Biden administration when my predecessor was director.”
Former FBI agent Peter Strzok has lost a long-running lawsuit claiming he was illegally fired during Donald Trump’s first term after sending text messages that criticized Trump.
Strzok argued in the lawsuit that his FBI bosses had retaliated against him in order to placate Trump, who was outraged over texts that Strzok exchanged while investigating ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.
In a ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said that, after several years gathering evidence and testimony from those involved in the 2018 decision to terminate the veteran counterintelligence agent, Strzok’s lawyers had failed to show that his dismissal violated his First Amendment rights.
Jackson, an Obama appointee, stressed that she was not ruling on whether Strzok’s firing “was the appropriate sanction” for his conduct, only that the voluminous evidence assembled over years of litigation — including a deposition of Trump himself — had not proven Strzok’s rights were violated.
Jackson’s full ruling is under seal, for now. But she disclosed a summary Tuesday that showed she also rejected Strzok’s argument that he had struck a binding deal with a top FBI disciplinary official under which Strzok would have been demoted and suspended for 60 days. The FBI’s deputy director at the time, David Bowdich, nixed that arrangement and fired Strzok.
Strzok, who worked as an agent for the FBI for 22 years before his firing, can appeal Jackson’s decision to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. His attorney, Aitan Goelman, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The ruling ends one chapter in one of the lengthiest legal sagas stemming from Trump’s first term, when he grew increasingly furious over the criminal and counterintelligence probes of his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Russia. The discovery of the anti-Trump text messages — including one in which Strzok suggested the FBI might “stop” Trump from becoming president — helped Trump cast those probes as a corrupt “witch hunt” and embroil the bureau in years of controversy.
The imbroglio became tabloid fodder, as well, after it was revealed that Strzok and the FBI lawyer with whom he exchanged many of the texts, Lisa Page, were having an affair at the time. Trump seized on that aspect of the story and mounted numerous attacks on Strzok and Page on social media and in public, sometimes disparaging Page in crude terms.
Strzok has long denied that his personal views about Trump influenced his actions on the job, and a lengthy inspector general review found no evidence that the Russia probe was affected by bias. But the saga helped Trump rally his supporters and regain his footing after a rocky start to his presidency.
In 2019, Strzok and Page filed separate lawsuits over the episode. Page, who quit the FBI in 2018, claimed that the Justice Department’s disclosure of her text messages to reporters violated the Privacy Act. Strzok’s suit made similar claims but also challenged his firing.
Last year, during the Biden administration, the Justice Department agreed to pay Page $800,000 to settle her suit and to pay Strzok $1.2 million to settle his privacy-invasion claims. Strzok’s claims related to his firing were not part of the settlement.
FBI Director Kash Patel, a longtime Trump loyalist, recently faced questions from Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) about the settlements paid to Strzok and Page, with demands that Patel identify the FBI officials who authorized them. Patel said the agreements were “reached in the Biden administration when my predecessor was director.”
