Justice Department push against Trump’s foes reaches higher gear WASHINGTON—With the midterms looming, the Justice Department has attempted a frenzy of legal maneuvers to advance President Trump’s demands to prosecute his political foes.

The pace over the last two weeks has been rapid even by the quick-turn efforts that have been a feature of the Justice Department’s alignment with Trump’s agenda.

Federal authorities searched the home of top Trump critic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) and are trying to build a case that could lead to her deportation. They initiated a third prosecution of former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey. And Kash Patel, the current director who was previously a sharp critic of the bureau, announced charges against a pair of former FBI intelligence officials, alleging they lied to Congress about their roles in years-old investigations of former President Joe Biden’s son Hunter.

That case is already on thin ice, with a judge holding a second day of hearings Wednesday on whether the charges are proper and justified. In the same courthouse, prosecutors tried and failed to indict former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson over her testimony to Congress more than four years ago that linked Trump to the Jan. 6, 2021, violence at the U.S. Capitol.

Former federal prosecutors and other legal observers say the department’s actions show hallmark signs of being rushed. The Justice Department has deployed a series of uncommon legal maneuvers to advance the cases, many of which focus on years-old claims. Two of them were charged without the involvement of grand juries, a step required before a prosecution can move toward trial.

The blitz comes as Justice Department leadership is under pressure to show progress before the election on Trump’s priorities, according to people familiar with the matter. Even if the cases fail, as several prior ones have, they have generated the kinds of headlines that Trump praises.

“While the president would undoubtedly be happy to see the people he perceives as his enemies convicted and sentenced, his purpose is served simply by making them go through the criminal process,” said Peter Keisler, who served as acting attorney general under former President George W. Bush.

Past administrations of both parties had sought to avoid taking major, public-facing investigative steps in the run-up to an election, concerned by the appearance of trying to influence the outcome.

Justice Department officials say their actions aren’t being dictated by the electoral calendar. “This Department is following the facts and the law, not anyone’s political timetable,” a spokeswoman said.

Attorney General Todd Blanche, who, unlike most of his predecessors, has been a frequent presence at campaign rallies and political events, has defended the timing of recent actions as the normal progression of investigations.

“We don’t do political paybacks,” Blanche told reporters during a news conference last week announcing the indictment of a longtime Democratic senator in Virginia.

The Trump administration’s actions underscore how much the president has changed the priorities and practices of the Justice Department. Many Republicans continue to support at least some of the department’s actions, believing it was previously weaponized by Democrats to pursue Trump and his allies for political gain. The department, however, appears to be facing declining public support.

About 45% of Americans surveyed by the Pew Research Center this fall said they had an unfavorable view of the Justice Department, compared with 40% who see it favorably. That spread is worse than in 2023, when 49% viewed the department positively, compared with 41% who responded negatively.

Paul Cassell, a former federal judge, said prosecutors are relying on tools that are more appropriate for filing emergency charges against defendants, such as when a suspect has been arrested in the act of committing a crime.

Prosecutors charged Comey, whom Trump blames for cooking up an investigation into the ties between his 2016 campaign and Russia, on allegations that he leaked national-defense information 10 years ago. The government relied on a document known as a criminal information, which is typically filed when a grand jury appears to be unnecessary, such as when a guilty plea is anticipated.

“The Justice Department had to file 38 pages of complex legal briefing about why their maneuvering is permissible, when if you had a solid case it would have been faster to go to a grand jury and ask for an indictment,” said Cassell, a criminal law professor at the University of Utah.

Comey says two separate U.S. attorneys previously investigated the alleged disclosure of classified information and declined to prosecute him.

The department filed a long court brief defending its tactics, saying a law defining the statute of limitations for most felony crimes allows prosecutors to initiate a case by criminal information. Comey’s lawyers say the government’s move isn’t legally valid.

In the case against the FBI officials who were connected to the Hunter Biden probe, Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui on Tuesday criticized the department’s approach to charging the case—and rejected an overnight attempt to add an obstruction charge on top of the original lying-to-Congress allegations.

In a filing after midnight, the Justice Department sought to add the charge through what it called a superseding criminal complaint, without the typical review and signature of a judge.

Faruqui characterized the move as unprecedented and inappropriate, saying the abnormal procedure was “throwing enormous amounts of gasoline onto this fire” of questions about the Justice Department’s motivations.

A Justice Department lawyer defended the process but conceded it was a first for him as well.