Steven G. Bradbury
Role: Contributor
Position: Former General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and Acting Deputy Secretary of Transportation
Background:
Steven G. Bradbury served as the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) during the Trump administration from 2017 to 2021. He also served as the Acting Deputy Secretary of Transportation. Before his tenure at the DOT, Bradbury was a partner at Dechert LLP and had a distinguished career in private legal practice. He holds a JD from the University of Michigan Law School and a BA from Stanford University. Bradbury is well-known for his expertise in regulatory law, transportation policy, and administrative law.
Relation to Trump:
Steven G. Bradbury’s role as General Counsel and Acting Deputy Secretary of Transportation placed him at the core of the Trump administration’s transportation policy and regulatory agenda. His work involved implementing and defending the administration’s policies on infrastructure, safety regulations, and innovation in transportation technology. His leadership at the DOT was integral to advancing the administration’s goals in these areas.
Scandals or Controversies:
Bradbury’s most notable controversies stem from his time at the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) during the George W. Bush administration, where he authored memos that justified the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, which many have labeled as torture. These memos have been a source of significant legal and ethical debate and have continued to attract scrutiny throughout his career. His nomination to the DOT was controversial, with critics raising concerns about his past legal work. Despite this, he was confirmed by the Senate in a 50-47 vote. During his time at the DOT, there were no major personal scandals, but his previous involvement in controversial legal opinions has continued to follow him.
Potential Concerns:
Bradbury’s tenure at the DOT involved navigating complex regulatory environments and overseeing significant transportation policies. Critics have raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest given his previous work in the private sector. Additionally, his legal opinions during his time at the OLC under President George W. Bush, particularly regarding enhanced interrogation techniques, have been controversial and criticized for their ethical and legal implications.