Donald Trump DOJ official may have just broken the law during petty social media spat: expert
Harmeet Dhillon, who serves as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights in President Donald Trump’s Justice Department, attended a meeting at the Justice Department in Washington in April 2025. Over the weekend, she became involved in a public controversy that has now raised serious legal and constitutional questions.
According to reporting by journalist Adam Klasfeld, Dhillon may have crossed a line by reacting aggressively to criticism online and then blocking a conservative lawyer who challenged her conduct. The situation began when Dhillon posted on social media that Democrats involved in running the House January 6 Committee could still face investigation and even criminal charges. She argued that there would be no statute of limitations preventing the Justice Department from going after them, even years later, and insisted that January 6, 2026, was not a cutoff date for prosecutions.
When people questioned her interpretation of the law, Dhillon responded sharply. From her personal account, she mocked her critics, suggesting they did not understand basic legal concepts and complaining that she had to stop her knitting to explain statutes of limitation. The tone of her message came across as dismissive and sarcastic, especially given her role as a high-ranking Justice Department official.
One of the people who responded was Damin Toell, a Brooklyn-based lawyer and political commentator. He pointed out that Dhillon now works for the Department of Justice and suggested that public taunts on social media were not appropriate behavior for someone in her position. Shortly after posting this response, Toell discovered that Dhillon had blocked him on the platform, even though they had previously followed each other. He shared a screenshot of the block and expressed disbelief at what had happened.
This move raised alarms for legal observers. Klasfeld warned that when public officials block critics on social media, even from personal accounts, it can violate the First Amendment. Courts have ruled that when officials use social media to communicate about official business, blocking people because of their viewpoints can amount to unconstitutional censorship. Given that Dhillon leads the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, critics argued she should be especially aware of these legal limits.
The situation also echoes past legal trouble faced by Donald Trump himself. While he was president, Trump frequently blocked critics on Twitter. In one major case, an appeals court ruled that blocking users from his account violated the First Amendment because it silenced opposing views in a space used for official communication. Although the Supreme Court later set aside that ruling and narrowed the precedent, the underlying issue remains legally sensitive.
What began as a heated exchange on social media may now turn into a broader legal controversy, highlighting once again how public officials’ online behavior can have real constitutional consequences.
