in

President Trump Terminates Taxpayer-Funded Security Detail for Dr. Anthony Fauci

Fauci
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 04: Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases listens as U.S. President Donald Trump answers questions in the press briefing room with members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force on April 4, 2020 in Washington, DC. On Friday, the CDC issued a recommendation that all Americans should wear masks or cloth face coverings in public settings to slow the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19). (Photo by Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump has officially ended the taxpayer-funded security detail assigned to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. This decision comes after Fauci received federal protection due to threats stemming from his prominent role during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background:

In 2020, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) arranged for security measures to safeguard Dr. Fauci following numerous threats related to his public health guidance during the pandemic. These protections were maintained throughout his tenure and continued after his retirement in December 2022.

Recent Developments:

As of January 2025, President Trump has revoked these security provisions. When questioned about the potential risks to Fauci without federal protection, President Trump emphasized that government resources should not be indefinitely allocated for personal security of former officials. He suggested that individuals like Dr. Fauci, who have substantial earnings, should be responsible for their own security arrangements.

Implications:

This move aligns with the administration’s broader initiative to reassess and reduce government-funded security details for former officials. Similar actions have been taken concerning other ex-officials, including former National Security Advisor John Bolton and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Dr. Fauci has not publicly commented on the revocation of his security detail. It remains unclear whether he will seek private security measures moving forward.

This decision has sparked discussions about the balance between ensuring the safety of public figures and the appropriate use of taxpayer funds. Supporters argue that it is fiscally responsible to limit government-funded security to current officials, while critics express concern over the potential risks faced by individuals who have been subject to credible threats due to their public service.