Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
New York Attorney General Letitia James — the Democrat who once won a $500 million civil judgment against Donald Trump — was indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury in Virginia, in what critics are calling a stunning act of political retribution by the president against one of his most prominent foes.
James, 66, was charged with one count of bank fraud and one count of making false statements to a financial institution. The indictment alleges she falsely claimed a Norfolk, Virginia, home was her second residence to obtain favorable mortgage terms and misrepresented that she rented it to a local family. If convicted, she could face up to 30 years in prison and $1 million in fines per count.
The charges come just months after Trump publicly urged his Justice Department appointees to “bring accountability” to James, who led the landmark civil fraud case that temporarily barred him from doing business in New York. That case, which accused Trump of inflating his assets to obtain favorable loans, was overturned by a state appeals court this summer — a decision the president has repeatedly cited as evidence that James “fabricated everything.”
“These charges are baseless, and the president’s own public statements make clear that his only goal is political retribution at any cost,” James said in a statement, echoing her remarks in a video posted to X. “The president’s actions are a grave violation of our Constitutional order and have drawn sharp criticism from members of both parties.”
Political and Legal Turmoil
The indictment was handed up in the Eastern District of Virginia after the resignation of the acting U.S. attorney, Erik S. Siebert, who left last month under pressure following Trump’s public demand that he be “out.” Trump replaced him with Lindsey Halligan — one of his personal attorneys — despite her lack of prosecutorial experience. Halligan personally presented the case to the grand jury, a move former Justice Department officials called “unprecedented.”
“The facts and the law in this case are clear, and we will continue following them to ensure that justice is served,” Halligan said in a statement Thursday.
James’ attorney, Abbe Lowell, argued the indictment was “driven by President Trump’s desire for revenge,” pointing to reports that career prosecutors initially declined to pursue the case for lack of evidence. “When a president can publicly direct charges to be filed against someone — after it was reported that career attorneys concluded none were warranted — it marks a serious attack on the rule of law,” Lowell said.
James is set to appear in federal court in Norfolk on Oct. 24. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Jamar K. Walker, a Biden appointee.
Pattern of Political Indictments
The prosecution of James follows a series of extraordinary criminal actions brought by the Trump administration against some of his past critics, including former FBI Director James Comey, who was indicted last month on charges of lying to Congress and obstructing a proceeding. In both cases, Halligan handled the grand jury presentations herself — a departure from Justice Department norms that typically require experienced prosecutors and internal sign-off from multiple divisions.
“The president can’t make a grand jury do anything,” Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., told NBC News on Thursday, rejecting claims of political interference. “The evidence is what drives these cases.”
But former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam said the episode reflects “a chilling use of presidential influence over prosecutorial discretion.” Lam noted that in Comey’s case, only 14 of 23 grand jurors voted to indict — a narrow margin, even under the lower “probable cause” standard required for an indictment.
“It would be concerning to any career prosecutor that so many grand jurors expressed hesitation,” Lam said. “This is about more than just one case — it’s about whether the justice system is being bent to political will.”
Bipartisan Reaction and Constitutional Stakes
Democrats quickly condemned the indictment, likening it to authoritarian retaliation against political opponents. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., accused Trump of “using the Justice Department as his personal attack dog.”
“This isn’t justice. It’s revenge,” Schumer said in a statement. “And it should horrify every American who believes no one is above the law.”
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said on X that the indictment represented “the weaponization of the Justice Department to punish those who hold the powerful accountable.”
Republicans largely dismissed the criticism. Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said there was “accountability happening now.” Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who is retiring at the end of his term, took a more cautious stance: “I just hope they’ve done their homework and have a valid basis for the indictment.”
A Battle Over Power and Precedent
The indictment underscores a defining feature of Trump’s second term — his willingness to use the machinery of government against perceived enemies, a theme that has alarmed legal scholars and even some allies. The Justice Department has insisted that prosecutions are insulated from political pressure, but Trump himself has repeatedly linked law enforcement outcomes to his political grievances.
“We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility,” Trump wrote on Truth Social last week, referring to his calls to prosecute James, Comey, and other former officials. “They impeached me twice, and indicted me (five times!) OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”
For Letitia James, the once-triumphant prosecutor now stands accused in the same kind of courtroom battle she once waged — one that could test not only her own fate but the limits of presidential power itself.
