海角大神

As firewall between White House and DOJ erodes, Americans are losing trust

Fifty years ago, then-Attorney General Edward Levi issued a warning about the perils of political interference in law enforcement.

鈥淧opular governments are prone to cycles,鈥� he in 1976. 鈥淲e are in such a period of cyclical reaction today, justifying what we do now as a kind of getting even with the events of prior years.鈥�

Levi was speaking from experience. He became the attorney general in the aftermath of Watergate, when public trust in government had , and he is often credited with having restored the Justice Department鈥檚 as a nonpartisan law enforcement agency.

Now, the DOJ appears to be experiencing another 鈥渃yclical reaction.鈥�

The agency has prosecuted two of President Donald Trump鈥檚 political adversaries: the New York attorney general and a former FBI director. As Mr. Trump has pressured the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, the Justice Department has launched investigations into the Fed chair and another governor at the central bank. One of Mr. Trump鈥檚 first acts upon taking office last year was to pardon those convicted in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, whom he called . His administration subsequently purged the DOJ and the FBI of career employees who had worked on those prosecutions.

Between his first and second terms, Mr. Trump faced four separate criminal prosecutions, including two initiated by the Biden administration鈥檚 Justice Department. Many Republicans criticized those prosecutions as politically motivated. When he returned to the White House, Mr. Trump issued an that denounced the Biden administration for engaging in 鈥渁 systematic campaign against its perceived political opponents.鈥�

Ever since, however, his administration has appeared to be carrying out its own campaign of weaponized justice that鈥檚 ramped up notably in recent months, according to interviews with former Justice Department prosecutors and legal scholars.

One result: Polls show half the country doubts whether federal law enforcement is fair and impartial.

鈥淭he Justice Department has always been a standard bearer for professionalism and integrity and ethics,鈥� says Kami Chavis, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at William & Mary Law School. 鈥淲e have really held those attorneys in the highest esteem, and now that is all being thrown into question.鈥�

Testing the traditional firewall

Every president enters office with the prerogative to set new priorities for the Justice Department. Mr. Trump campaigned to do just that, promising to focus on stricter immigration enforcement and crack down on fentanyl trafficking, among other things. But he promised more: to turn the political 鈥渓awfare鈥� he claims Democrats had waged against him and his supporters back against those aggressors.

鈥淚 am your retribution,鈥� he pledged in a 2023 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, held just outside Washington.

While the DOJ is equipped to shift enforcement priorities from administration to administration, it is designed to resist political influence. The department鈥檚 key leaders 鈥� such as the attorney general and the U.S. attorneys leading regional offices 鈥� are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Yet those leaders oversee career prosecutors and civil lawyers who expect to work under presidents from both parties.

There are no laws or constitutional requirements that the Justice Department operate independently from the rest of the executive branch. Instead, the firewall between the White House and Justice has been held together by intangibles such as norms, policies, and legal ethics.

This Trump administration has tested that firewall in unprecedented ways.

Even before Mr. Trump returned to office, some of his allies were laying plans for reforms to the Justice Department. Project 2025, the conservative policymaking blueprint for the administration, that failing to reform the agency 鈥� including weeding out 鈥渞adical Left鈥� employees and ending 鈥渧iewpoint-based enforcement鈥� 鈥� would 鈥済uarantee the failure of that conservative Administration鈥檚 agenda.鈥�

But reform efforts have clashed with long-standing DOJ norms and policies, fueling perceptions that the department is still being used as a political weapon.

that dozens of federal prosecutors have either resigned or been fired for refusing to file charges that aren鈥檛 supported by probable cause, a violation of . that White House officials 鈥� including Mr. Trump himself 鈥� have directly discussed investigations with DOJ employees, a violation of the department鈥檚 .

Polling from the past year shows a decline in public confidence in the Justice Department. While Republicans currently have more trust in the agency 鈥� a 180-degree reversal from the Biden years 鈥� that support is also starting to waver.

An August from the Pew Research Center found that fewer than 4 in 10 Americans had a favorable view of the department, compared with 51% of Republicans. Another Pew , conducted last month, found that only 42% of Republicans say they are confident Mr. Trump is acting ethically in office, a 13-point decline from the start of his term a year ago.

鈥淎 chain of command鈥�

Chad Mizelle, a close ally of Trump officials who has worked in both Trump administrations, posted a hiring announcement on X last weekend. The Justice Department, he , is interested in hiring 鈥済ood prosecutors鈥� who 鈥渟upport President Trump and [his] anti-crime agenda.鈥�

The post quickly drew attention, including from Ed Whelan, a conservative lawyer with experience at the department, who that 鈥渋t would be good to know if DOJ is taking the position that support for the president is a lawful criterion in hiring [assistant U.S. attorneys].鈥�

Yet this job post is consistent with how Mr. Trump鈥檚 Justice Department appointees believe the department should operate: as an agency subject to direct presidential control like any other part of the executive branch.

In a issued shortly after taking office, Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote that DOJ attorneys must 鈥渮ealously defend the interests of the United States.鈥� Those interests, she added, 鈥渁re set by the Nation鈥檚 Chief Executive.鈥�

Federal prosecutors 鈥渁re not independent, they don鈥檛 work for themselves,鈥� says Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project, a group that advocates confirming conservative judges to the federal courts. 鈥淭hey work in a chain of command that reports to the president, who is elected by Americans.鈥�

But that kind of apparent loyalty test for an agency whose job is to protect all Americans鈥� constitutional freedoms could set the country 鈥渄own a very dangerous path,鈥� says Jeffrey Cohen, a former Justice Department prosecutor who now teaches at Boston College Law School.

The incentives to file trumped-up charges to please the president would be rife in such a scenario.

If the president 鈥渃an tell the attorney general the people he or she wants prosecuted ... that seems very different from the president setting priorities,鈥� Mr. Cohen adds.

Political prosecutions, unusual contacts

There are suggestions that the Justice Department has already been trying to carry out the president鈥檚 personal wishes.

Former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James 鈥� both longtime Trump adversaries 鈥� faced criminal charges. Both had their cases dismissed last year after a judge ruled that the interim U.S. attorney who filed the charges, Lindsey Halligan, had been appointed unlawfully.

Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve board of governors, is under criminal investigation for mortgage fraud. She has yet to be formally charged. Jerome Powell, the Fed chair, announced on Jan. 11 that he is now under DOJ investigation for cost overruns on renovations to historic Fed buildings.

It鈥檚 unclear whether Mr. Trump personally pressured the Justice Department to pursue these cases behind the scenes. But the president鈥檚 public statements alone can be seen as exerting unusual influence. He has been highly critical of Mr. Powell for months, while publicly pushing for the central bank to lower interest rates more aggressively to help stimulate the economy.

In the cases of Mr. Comey and Ms. James, Mr. Trump mentioned them by name in a social media last fall. 鈥淲e can鈥檛 delay any longer,鈥� he wrote. 鈥淛USTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!鈥� The post, which began with 鈥淧am,鈥� might have as a private message to Ms. Bondi.

Two other foes 鈥� John Bolton, a former Trump national security adviser, and John Brennan, a former CIA director 鈥� are also in the Justice Department鈥檚 crosshairs. Mr. Bolton is under indictment for mishandling classified documents, while Mr. Brennan is being investigated for making false statements to Congress.

Mass resignations

Waves of mass resignations have also marked a year of turbulence at the DOJ.

Seven prosecutors in the department鈥檚 vaunted Manhattan office and in its Public Integrity Unit quit instead of signing on to the motion to dismiss bribery and fraud charges against Eric Adams, then the mayor of New York City. The dismissal came as the Trump administration sought the city鈥檚 cooperation with its immigration enforcement campaign.

鈥淥ur laws and traditions do not allow using the prosecutorial power to influence other citizens, much less elected officials, in this way,鈥� wrote one prosecutor in his .

Between January and June last year, nine DOJ civil rights lawyers resigned after working on investigations into antisemitism on University of California campuses. Senior department officials, they claimed, pressured them to bring charges despite having insufficient evidence.

Ms. Halligan ended up leading the Comey and James cases because the man she replaced, Erik Siebert, the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, had resigned under pressure after going months without filing charges against Ms. James.

And in recent weeks, at least 14 federal prosecutors in Minnesota have reportedly resigned amid investigations into the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis. Some of the prosecutors resigned in protest of a DOJ directive to investigate Ms. Good鈥檚 partner. (When asked to comment on the resignations, a department spokesperson referred to Ms. Bondi鈥檚 鈥渮ealous advocacy鈥� .)

Credibility and weaponization

Some Republicans in Congress have begun raising concerns about the Justice Department鈥檚 conduct. The Powell investigation, specifically, has drawn condemnation.

鈥淚t is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question,鈥� said Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, in a Jan. 11 statement.

鈥淚f the Department of Justice believes an investigation into Chair Powell is warranted based on project cost overruns 鈥� which are not unusual 鈥� then Congress needs to investigate the Department of Justice,鈥� said Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska on Jan. 12.

The Trump administration, however, is reportedly looking to increase the workload of the Weaponization Working Group, which Ms. Bondi last year to investigate alleged political prosecutions carried out by the DOJ during the Biden administration.聽The department recently removed Ed Martin 鈥� a Trump ally and former interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia 鈥� from leading the working group, in part because an investigation found he had leaked grand jury materials related to a mortgage fraud prosecution of another Trump foe, Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California.

The working group has not been involved in most cases against Mr. Trump鈥檚 adversaries. Still, the Justice Department鈥檚 work so far is illustrating just how fragile the agency鈥檚 independence from politics has always been, says Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Georgetown University Law Center.

鈥淭here鈥檚 nothing per se that鈥檚 illegal about Trump ordering criminal investigations or prosecutions of people he doesn鈥檛 like,鈥� he adds. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 only been the norm; it hasn鈥檛 been a formal law.鈥�