Rule of Law

Trump’s attorney general pick must navigate lobbying background

Pam Bondi, Donald Trump’s pick to be the next attorney general, worked for years at a lobbying firm where her clients included corporate giants such as Amazon, Uber and General Motors.

Now, if confirmed, the former Florida attorney general would oversee a Justice Department charged with making sure big businesses follow the rules, an area that can touch on everything from employment discrimination to corporate fraud.

None of her past work should disqualify her from taking the attorney general role, lobbying experts say, but she will likely have to carefully navigate a slew of potential conflicts of interests.

Some of Bondi’s past clients have been the subject of Justice Department scrutiny in recent years. And questions about conflict of interests could also arise from the clients of Ballard Partners, the lobbying firm Bondi joined that has represented companies such as TikTok, Comcast Corp. and Walgreen Co.

“As attorney general, she would want to avoid even the perception of a conflict of interest, because otherwise the public will not feel that they can trust that office,” said Beth Leech, a professor at Rutgers University who is an expert on interest groups and lobbying in American politics.

Meanwhile, critics say Bondi’s years as a lobbyist — and her ties to big companies — raise concerns that she will go soft on corporate enforcement compared to the Biden administration or focus DOJ resources on other enforcement areas.

Jeff Hauser, the executive director of the progressive watchdog group Revolving Door Project, said the Justice Department touches “every sort of implementation of limits on corporate power across the U.S. code.”

“I am very worried about her ability to make an unbiased decision about priorities with respect to corporate misconduct,” Hauser said.

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

Supreme Court not fully sold on foreclosure fairness bid

Courthouse News Service
A showdown over tax foreclosures had the justices considering the striking set of facts that...
Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Oral Argument Focuses on Takings Clause, While Largely Ignoring the Problematic Excessive-Fines-Clause Analysis Applied by the Court Below

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Pung v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
February 24, 2026

50+ Organizations Condemn Federal Authorities for Blocking Minnesota’s Independent Investigation into CBP Killing of Alex Pretti

WASHINGTON, DC — Today marks one month since the killing of Alex Pretti on January...
Rule of Law
February 20, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Rejects President Trump’s Claim of Unilateral Tariff Authority

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump...
By: Simon Chin
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Climate United Fund v. Citibank

In Climate United Fund v. Citibank, the en banc United States of Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can unilaterally abolish a mandatory grant program created by Congress.
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oregon v. Landis

In Oregon v. Landis, the Ninth Circuit is considering when states may prosecute federal officers for state crimes.