Crucial Quote
“Initiating a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action—particularly official action that the federal government cannot directly require those political opponents to take—is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use of the grand-jury process,” Schiltz wrote, later adding, “The fact that connections between the information sought in the subpoenas and any possible criminal violation range from extremely weak to nonexistent only adds to the overwhelming evidence that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce, and retaliate.”
Read more Clive Davis’s Biggest Acts: Springsteen, Houston, Manilow
What to Watch for
The Trump administration can still appeal the judge’s ruling and try again to issue the subpoenas. It remains to be seen what charges the DOJ could try to bring against Minnesota officials, if any. The subpoenas into the Minnesota officials over immigration is also distinct from a criminal referral Vice President JD Vance made in June, which asked the DOJ to investigate Walz and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison for potential misconduct in connection with alleged fraud schemes in the state. Making a criminal referral to the DOJ doesn’t necessarily mean the agency will launch an investigation, and it’s unclear whether the DOJ may be pursuing Vance’s claims. If it is, that investigation would not be impacted by Schiltz’s ruling Monday.
Key Background
The subpoenas against the Minnesota officials are part of a broader string of actions the DOJ has taken against Trump’s political enemies, as numerous foes of the president have come under investigation. The DOJ has launched investigations into such Democrats as New York Attorney General Letitia James, Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, along with others who have drawn the president’s ire, like former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, former FBI Director James Comey and former Trump adviser John Bolton. While Bolton will plead guilty to charges related to retaining classified documents, the Trump administration has suffered a number of setbacks in other cases: A judge dismissed prosecutions against Comey and James, grand juries rejected new charges against the New York AG and, similar to Monday’s ruling, a judge also threw out a subpoena against Powell for being politically motivated. (The DOJ has since brought new charges against Comey.) Schiltz pointed to the DOJ’s pattern of investigating the president’s enemies as being further evidence the Minnesota subpoenas were retaliatory, writing the subpoenas “played out against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s well-established history of using criminal investigations to retaliate against and pressure the President’s political and personal adversaries.”
Read more Kennedy Center Becoming A ‘Lifeless Husk’ Under Trump, Court Filing Alleges
Further Reading
Gov. Walz, Mayor Frey Subpoenaed Amid ICE Clash In Minnesota (Forbes)
Trump Can’t Subpoena Fed’s Powell, Judge Rules—Says President Just Trying To ‘Harass’ Fed Chair (Forbes)
Read more What We Know About The Future Of Amazon’s Dropped Sam Altman Film Biopic
Gavin Newsom Says Trump DOJ Is Investigating Him (Forbes)