Something about it seems almost too obvious. The Justice Department that once looked into Donald Trump is now led by Todd Blanche, the man who sat next to him in a Manhattan courtroom and defended his innocence. Not too long ago, this arrangement would have seemed like political fiction. And yet here we are, silently witnessing that arrangement fall apart.
Recent reports from a variety of sources depict a Justice Department that has been manipulated, coerced, and, in some cases, successfully repurposed to further the White House’s political objectives. The legal ramifications are beginning to manifest. Cases have been challenging. There has been undermining of prosecutors. Furthermore, rather than fixing long-standing issues, the interference has created new legal exposure in at least some cases.
The extent of the harm done to career attorneys, institutional norms, and the silent machinery that keeps federal prosecutions going is still unknown. However, the indications are not promising. Internal checks have been significantly undermined, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has monitored the department’s accountability systems since last October. The fallout is currently being processed by the courts.
The battle for Blanche’s confirmation has turned into a slow-motion drama in and of itself. It was anticipated that he would pass the Senate Judiciary Committee with little opposition. That doesn’t seem to be certain anymore. Republicans can’t always count on Senator Susan Collins’ support, but she has expressed reluctance. It’s unclear if her worry will influence the result, but the fact that a nomination this far along in a second-term agenda is causing any controversy at all says something. It claims that there are boundaries that people aren’t quite prepared to publicly cross, even within the Republican Senate.
And there’s Jack Smith. On September 22, the former special counsel who filed federal charges against Trump—charges that were eventually dropped after Trump took office again—has consented to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The letter from his attorneys to Chairman Chuck Grassley was meticulous and exact. They stated that Smith upheld his rulings, adhered to Justice Department policy, and complied with the law. That man isn’t getting ready to apologize. That man is getting ready to set a record.
The invitation was sharply framed in the opposite direction by Grassley, who called the investigation “deeply flawed” and “weaponized,” pointing out that during the investigation, Smith’s team had access to text messages from over forty members of Congress. Beneath the political rhetoric, there is a serious question about the extent of that surveillance and whether the right procedures were followed. It merits careful investigation. However, it’s difficult to ignore the fact that the hearing, whatever its outcome, will take place in a setting where the definition of “accountability” varies greatly depending on which side of the room you are seated on.
When observing this time period from a distance, it’s remarkable how much of the current crisis can be traced back to decisions made inside the White House rather than by judges, prosecutors, or Congress. In a significant way, the legal obstacles, the delayed confirmation, and the increased congressional scrutiny are all self-inflicted. Threats were meant to be neutralized by Trump’s hostility toward the Justice Department. Rather, it seems to have multiplied them.
One particular irony is that, as the 2026 midterms draw near, Trump’s own administration is quietly ignoring a law he signed during his first term that requires intelligence assessments of election interference. Foreign influence campaigns are still going on. Congress has not received the required reports. Additionally, Trump has opted to present his own account of events during prime time. One of the more genuinely open questions going into fall is whether voters will notice that swap.
Certain crises are caused by external factors. This one appears to be the result of deliberate decisions made step by step by individuals who thought the rules applied to everyone but themselves.
