There are many fair and relatively objective articles about Trump’s weaponization of the justice system and, in particular, the Department of Justice. DOJ Tax Alumni have seen that, for example, in the treatment of David Hubbert, which resulted in his retirement. See Deputy AAG Tax Hubbert Removed and Reassigned to Sanctuary City Program (Whatever That Is) (DOJ Tax Division Alumni Blog 2/7/25; 2/11/25), here.
I write here to alert Alumni to one article that I think is particularly good. Paul Rosenzweig, The Destruction of the Department of Justice (The Atlantic 5/4/25), here.
JAT NOTE: You may not be able to access the article. I tried to make the link a gift. Although The Atlantic says I should be able to gift the article to those who are not subscribers, I can’t figure out how to do it.
For those unable to access the whole article, I include some excerpts (fair use, I hope):
His attack on the institution is threefold: He is using the mechanisms of justice to go after political opponents; he is using those same mechanisms to reward allies; and he is eliminating internal opposition within the department. Each incident making up this pattern is appalling; together, they amount to the decimation of a crucial institution.
Investigations should be based on facts and the law, not politics. Yet Trump has made punishing political opposition the hallmark of his investigative efforts. The DOJ’s independence from political influence, long a symbol of its probity (remember how scandalous it was that Bill Clinton had a brief meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch?), is now nonexistent.
* * * *
But the most aggressive abuser of the criminal-justice system has to be the interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin. Martin has asked the FBI to investigate several of President Joe Biden’s EPA grantees for alleged fraud—a claim so weak that one of Martin’s senior subordinates resigned rather than have to advance it in court. He has also begun to investigate, or threatened investigations of, Georgetown University, Senator Charles Schumer, and Representatives Eugene Vindman and Robert Garcia, among others. More recently, in mid-April, Martin sent a series of inquiry letters to at least three medical and scientific journals, asking them how they ensured “competing viewpoints,” with the evident intention of suggesting that the failure to include certain minority opinions was, in some way, content discrimination.
* * * *
A final example of DOJ overreach is, perhaps, the most chilling of all. In a recently issued presidential memorandum, Trump directed the attorney general to “investigate and take appropriate action concerning allegations regarding the use of online fundraising platforms to make ‘straw’ or ‘dummy’ contributions and to make foreign contributions to U.S. political candidates and committees, all of which break the law.” Were the investigation neutral in nature, this might be understandable. But it isn’t.
In fact, there are two major fundraising platforms in use—WinRed (the Republican platform) and ActBlue (the Democratic one). Even though WinRed has been the subject of seven times as many FTC complaints as ActBlue, the Trump memorandum involves only the latter. By targeting his opponents’ fundraising, Trump is overtly marshaling the powers of federal law enforcement in his effort to shut down political opposition.
In essence, Trump is using the department to try to ensure future Republican electoral victories. One can hardly imagine a more horrifying variation on Lavrentiy Beria’s infamous boast: “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”
The article goes on to discuss Trump’s marshalling of “justice” to help friends and allies, including liberal targeted use of the pardon power to help supporters. Here are more excerpts:
