Surveying the current landscape where judges and prosecutors -- with the notable exception of Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida -- are being threatened with being investigated simply because they are overseeing a case involving Donald Trump, some legal experts are becoming increasingly alarmed that the U.S. system of justice is being turned upside down.
In interviews with the Washington Post's Jacqueline Alemany, law professors and legal experts who served in the DOJ are pushing back at threats made by high-profile Republicans like House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH), calling them out of line.
As Alemany wrote, "Investigate the investigator. That has been the operating thesis of the GOP’s playbook to counter the myriad criminal investigations into Donald Trump, the de facto leader of the Republican Party," adding, "The strategy has been effective in shaping public opinion of the investigations after years of sustained broadsides against the judicial system by Trump and his top allies."
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
That led former federal prosecutor Caren Morrison who teaches at Georgia State University College of Law to warn, "Big picture, this does seem incredibly troubling."
Morrison added, "For years I’ve told my students that one principle we can always rely on is the principle of prosecutorial discretion — it is unassailable and that is the essence of their power: They can choose which cases to pursue and which cases not to pursue. … We are kind of at a point where nobody agrees on what the rules are.”
"So far, congressional investigations have been launched against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, special counsel Jack Smith, and most recently, Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis — all of whom have charged Trump with crimes," the Post is reporting.
Former Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs Robert Raben also called out the unwarranted threats.
RELATED: Trump looking at Judge Chutkan placing him under house arrest: D.C. insider
“There are important lines of division that should not be penetrated — and we can squabble about where those lines are — but hauling up an investigator while something is pending to influence something to which you are not a party is inappropriate,” he explained.
Stephen Boyd, the former assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs under Donald Trump also questioned the manner in which the congressional investigations are being initiated.
“A professional and correctly conducted Justice Department investigation starts with a fact, and then follows to another fact, and leads to some sort of conclusion," he elaborated. "A Capitol Hill political investigation often starts with a conclusion and then looks for facts to support it. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Congress is wrong, but it means they are most interested in the things that prove their point.”
You can read more here.
