Former DOJ Prosecutor Sues Justice Department Over FACE Act-Related Firing

Key Facts

Plaintiff	Sunita Doddamani, former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Michigan
Filed	Monday, August 17, 2026
Court	U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Defendants	Attorney General Todd Blanche; Jerome Gorgon (U.S. Attorney, E.D. Michigan); Francey Hakes (Director, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys); several federal agencies/offices
Fired	April 2026, alongside at least two other prosecutors who worked FACE Act cases
Claims	Violations of the Civil Service Reform Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the First and Fifth Amendments
Relief sought	Declaration that her rights were violated; reinstatement; back pay; other relief
Underlying case	United States v. Zastrow — 2023 FACE Act prosecution of eight defendants in Sterling Heights, Michigan; all eight convicted at trial
Status	Newly filed; no response from DOJ yet

What Is This Lawsuit About?

Sunita Doddamani, a former federal prosecutor in Michigan’s Eastern District, has sued the Justice Department, alleging she was fired in retaliation for prosecutorial work she was assigned to do — not for any actual misconduct. According to the lawsuit and reporting on it, Doddamani served on the trial team in United States v. Zastrow, a 2023 case charging eight defendants with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and federal civil rights conspiracy laws in connection with blocking access to an abortion clinic in Sterling Heights, Michigan. All eight defendants were convicted at trial.

In April 2026, Doddamani was fired along with at least two other prosecutors who had worked on FACE Act cases. According to the lawsuit, she immediately lost access to her DOJ phone and email and was escorted out of the building the same day. Later that day, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, Jerome Gorgon, reportedly told staff in an office meeting that Doddamani and another prosecutor had been fired for alleged “misconduct” — while also saying he had no prior knowledge of the terminations or the reasoning behind them, according to the lawsuit.

One day after the firings, the Justice Department released a roughly 900-page report alleging that the Biden-era DOJ had improperly used the FACE Act to target anti-abortion activists. The department separately stated on social media that it had “terminated the employment of personnel responsible for weaponizing the FACE Act who still remained at the department.”

The Legal Claims

Doddamani’s lawsuit argues her termination was “politically motivated and retaliatory,” asserting that she was fired for carrying out prosecutorial work she was directed to do by her superiors, in a case the current administration has publicly characterized as improper. The suit alleges violations of:

• The Civil Service Reform Act, which governs protections for federal employees
• The Administrative Procedure Act
• The First Amendment
• The Fifth Amendment

The complaint states: “Unlawful terminations are a frequent tool of the Trump administration to achieve its political aims. DOJ officials have repeatedly attempted to justify firings and workforce reductions by portraying the employees targeted as culpable for the now-disfavored cases they had been assigned.”

The lawsuit also directly disputes the DOJ’s April report, arguing it mischaracterized the defendants in the underlying FACE Act cases as “peaceful, pro-life” individuals when, the complaint contends, “those individuals engaged in violent acts such as firebombing and arson, coordinated blockades that prevented patients from entering clinics, or made threats of violence.” The suit further notes that the report was produced without involvement from DOJ’s Office of Inspector General, the body that traditionally reviews the department’s conduct for misconduct.

What Relief Is Doddamani Seeking?

The lawsuit asks the court to:

1. Declare that her termination violated her legal rights
2. Order reinstatement to her position
3. Award back pay
4. Grant other appropriate relief

The complaint states Doddamani has suffered “adverse and harmful effects” from the firing, including lost or jeopardized financial opportunities and reputational harm.

Background on the FACE Act and Its Recent Enforcement History

The FACE Act, passed by Congress in 1994, makes it a federal crime to block, damage, or use force or threats to interfere with access to reproductive health clinics. Nonviolent, first-time offenses are misdemeanors; repeat offenses or those causing bodily injury or death can be charged as felonies. Supporters have argued the law was necessary to curb rising violence and intimidation at abortion clinics; critics have argued it can be applied in ways that burden the free speech rights of anti-abortion activists.

Early in the current administration, DOJ leadership announced it would no longer enforce FACE Act violations except in extraordinary circumstances, such as cases involving death or serious property damage. The president separately pardoned 23 people previously convicted under the statute. At the same time, according to reporting on the case, the department has allowed some pending FACE Act prosecutions involving abortion-rights activists (rather than anti-abortion activists) to proceed, including one Florida case that resulted in a 120-day prison sentence in March 2025.

The DOJ’s April 2026 report was described as the first work product of the department’s “Weaponization Working Group,” an initiative established under former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

DOJ’s Response

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit beyond referring back to the department’s earlier public statement that it had “terminated the employment of personnel responsible for weaponizing the FACE Act who still remained at the department.”

Frequently Asked Questions

Is this the only lawsuit of its kind against DOJ over these firings?

 Reporting indicates this is the latest in a series of lawsuits filed by former career DOJ employees alleging they were fired for improper political reasons, though this article covers Doddamani’s case specifically.

Has a court ruled on this case yet? 

No. The lawsuit was filed August 17, 2026, and as of this writing, DOJ has not filed a formal response.

What happened to the defendants in the underlying case Doddamani worked on?

 All eight defendants in United States v. Zastrow were convicted at trial in the FACE Act prosecution Doddamani worked on as part of the trial team.

Were other prosecutors fired at the same time?

 According to the lawsuit, at least two other prosecutors who had worked on FACE Act cases were fired the same day as Doddamani.

What is DOJ’s stated justification for the firings?

DOJ has publicly stated it terminated personnel it characterized as “responsible for weaponizing the FACE Act.” The department has not provided additional case-specific comment beyond that statement.

Sources

• CBS News — “Former federal prosecutor fired over FACE Act case sues DOJ for unlawful termination,” Sarah N. Lynch, August 17, 2026
• NPR — “Former federal prosecutor sues DOJ for ‘unlawful and retaliatory’ firing”, August 17, 2026

Update Log

• August 18, 2026 — Initial publication.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against contemporaneous legal and political reporting on the filed complaint, as of August 18, 2026. Last Updated: August 18, 2026.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws vary by state and individual circumstances differ. For advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified attorney.