Donald Trump’s intense pressure on the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to charge key foes with crimes based on dubious evidence is hurting the rule of law and violating departmental policies, according to scholars and former prosecutors. They warn that the politicisation may lead to some cases being dismissed before trial.
Charges have been filed against former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James by Lindsey Halligan, a former White House lawyer and novice prosecutor installed by Trump after he forced out a veteran prosecutor who deemed the cases weak. Comey is charged with lying to Congress and obstruction, while James faces bank fraud and false statement charges; both have pleaded not guilty.
Over 100 former DoJ officials filed an amicus brief on 27 October arguing that Comey’s prosecution is “vindictive” and should be dropped, citing longstanding policies barring such legal tactics. James Pearce, a former DoJ lawyer, said: “The public record suggests that the Comey prosecution neither adheres to those policies nor comports with the constitutional obligations underpinning them.”
Further contesting the charges, the Democracy Defenders Fund sent a letter to the DoJ inspector general, signed by ethics advisors from both Republican and Democratic administrations, blasting Trump’s move to appoint Halligan and seeking an investigation. “After Watergate, no precept was more central to the re-professionalisation of the justice department than distancing the White House from decision making about individual prosecutions,” said constitutional law professor Peter Shane.
Legal experts decry the “weaponisation” of the justice department to further Trump’s revenge drive against those he blames for his legal problems. Philip Lacovara, former counsel to the Watergate special prosecutor, said: “The overt and explicit ‘weaponisation’ of the justice department, in defiance of the professional judgement of career prosecutors, is the worst type of corruption of the rule of law.”
