The White House has granted 17 undated ethics waivers to members of senior staff. On the list are such stars as Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, as well as Don McGahn and six lawyers from Jones Day.
If potentially “retroactive” ethics waivers sounds like something that shouldn’t be a thing, you are not alone. From the New York Times:
Richard W. Painter, a White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, who has been critical of the Trump administration’s approach to ethics, said that backdating was not an acceptable approach.
“The only retroactive waiver I have ever heard of is called a pardon,” Mr. Painter wrote in an email.
AI Is Reshaping Legal Practice—But Tools Aren’t The Real Differentiator.
Explore the mindset, cultural shifts, and training strategies that define the AI‑savvy lawyer, revealing why human judgment, standardized competence, and integrated learning—not technology alone—will shape the future of the profession.
The waivers, the Times reports, allow aides to communicate with news organizations, even if they involve a “a former employer or former client.” That sounds like something directed at Bannon and his suspected continuing ties to Breitbart, but who can no for sure with this White House. Again, they didn’t even put a date on the waiver.
What we do know is that these waivers seem to frustrate Trump’s own “swamp draining” executive order that barred his appointees from doing what they are now allowed to do.
For the lawyers, the Washington Post reports:
In addition, six members of the White House counsel’s office — including counsel Donald McGahn — were granted waivers to participate in matters in which their former law firm, Jones Day, is representing the president, his campaign committee or other related political entities.
Opus 2 Steps Up Its AI Game With Acquisition Of A Legal Tech Startup
With the addition of Uncover’s technology, the litigation software is delivering rapid innovation.
To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with the waiver. You could argue that Jones Day lawyers, for instance, should be waived.
The problem, if there is one, is that you can’t make a waiver for an ethics violation after one has occurred. So the slipperiness of the timing of these waivers is cause for concern.
It’s another one of those Trump things where you don’t know if the sin is maliciousness or just incompetence. But whatever it is, it’s not “normal.”
White House Waivers May Have Violated Ethics Rules [New York Times]
White House grants ethics waivers to 17 appointees, including four former lobbyists [Washington Post]