Trump Justice Dept. considers removing key check on lawmaker prosecutions

Federal prosecutors across the country may soon be able to indict members of Congress without approval from lawyers in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, according to three people familiar with a proposal delivered to attorneys in the section last week.

Under the proposal, investigators and prosecutors would also not be required to consult with the section’s attorneys during key steps of probes into public officials, altering a long-standing provision in the Justice Department’s manual that outlines how investigations of elected officials should be conducted.

If adopted, the changes would remove a layer of review intended to ensure that cases against public officials are legally sound and not politically motivated. Career prosecutors in the Public Integrity Section guided and signed off on the criminal investigations into alleged corruption by New York Mayor Eric Adams (D) and former Democratic senator Bob Menendez.

A Justice Department spokesman confirmed the proposal and said that no final decisions have been made. The three people familiar with the proposal spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has repeatedly accused the Biden administration of having weaponized the Justice Department and has vowed to remove politics from the nation’s premier law enforcement agency. Since being sworn in, she has closely aligned the department — which traditionally keeps some distance from the White House — with the president, ratcheting up immigration enforcement and refocusing the civil rights division on culture war fights that go beyond traditional conservative causes such as religious freedom.

Federal law enforcement officials arrested Newark Mayor Ras Baraka (D) at an immigration facility this month, and prosecutors charged him with trespassing. Trump administration officials have warned that three members of Congress from New Jersey — all Democrats — who were at the facility with Baraka could be charged as well.

Public corruption cases are complicated and can be difficult to prosecute. The agency has lost many of its high-profile cases, including the botched prosecutions of former Republican senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and of former Democratic senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

But cutting the Public Integrity Section out of the approval process for lawmaker prosecutions entirely could give presidentially appointed U.S. attorneys more authority in shaping public corruption cases, making prosecutions more political, said Dan Schwager, a former Public Integrity Section attorney who now works in private practice.

“The reason you have the section is exactly what this administration says they want, which is stop politicization,” Schwager said. “That requires a respect and ability to understand how the laws have been applied in similar situations in the past. The only way to ensure that public officials on both sides of the aisle are treated similarly is to have as much institutional knowledge and experience as possible.”

The Public Integrity Section — known as PIN — is based out of Justice Department headquarters in Washington, and oversees prosecutions and investigations involving public officials and potential voting crimes. Created in the wake of the Watergate scandal, the section has dramatically shrunk during the Trump administration, dropping from around 30 prosecutors at the end of the Biden administration to fewer than five today. At least one person was removed from his position, others have resigned because they disagreed with directives from Trump officials and others have been detailed to different sections in the department, according to multiple people familiar with the section who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear retaliation.

The Justice Department has proposed permanently shrinking the Public Integrity Section, giving U.S. attorney’s offices more authority in overseeing lawmaker prosecutions.

The 93 U.S. attorneys offices across the country handle many public corruption investigations and prosecutions in their jurisdictions. But, according to the Justice Department manual, which is posted online, the PIN section must still be consulted on key steps in those investigations.

Public corruption cases can become particularly fraught near an election. Justice Department rules require PIN attorneys to be consulted on even nonpublic investigative steps — such as subpoenas and search warrants

The Justice Department manual says that PIN attorneys must approve — not just be consulted on — charges against Congress members when the allegations are related to their public office or campaign activities. Still, the attorney general has final say on whether an indictment should be brought.

In some instances, PIN attorneys will handle public corruption cases or partner with relevant U.S. attorney’s offices to investigate and bring cases against public officials. Such partnerships are more common with smaller U.S. attorney’s offices that have more staffing constraints than larger cities.

“The point of the review is to ensure that equal responsibility is held in the field at U.S. Attorney’s Offices as opposed to centralizing all authority in PIN,” the Justice Department spokesman said.

The Public Integrity Section is also tasked with handling voting-related cases. In contested elections, the section must determine whether and how the Justice Department would intervene.

The Public Integrity Section has been under fire since the early days of the Trump administration. In Trump’s first week in office, he removed the head of the section, Corey Amundson, as part of a wave of oustings of senior career officials across the Justice Department.

Amundson — a career official — was installed in the senior job during the first Trump administration.

Most leaders within the section resigned in February after an incredible standoff with the Trump administration, which demanded that a PIN attorney sign off on dropping corruption charges against Adams. The attorneys refused.

The Washington Post reported in February that political appointees in the Justice Department threatened to fire prosecutors if no one signed the memo. Edward Sullivan, a veteran public corruption prosecutor, was nearing retirement and offered to sign the memo to avoid a mass firing of prosecutors and to allow his colleagues time to find jobs elsewhere.

Sullivan is now the head of the small section.

When Ed Martin, Trump’s first pick to lead the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C., considered bringing charges against Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) about years-old comments he made about two Supreme Court justices, PIN prosecutors stepped in. The attorneys counseled Martin that Schumer’s language fell short of a prosecutable threat, according to multiple people familiar with the investigations.

“The attorney general is still the boss, so if the attorney general does not approve the case it is not brought — even if it is recommended for indictment,” said Paul Butler, a Georgetown Law professor and former PIN attorney. “There is still reason to be concerned. This is part of a shift in limiting the power of law enforcement experts in public corruption.”

—

Jeremy Roebuck contributed.