Is the Justice Department cutting breaks to people who seem loyal to Trump?

This story originally appeared on NPR.

Justice Department veterans are noticing a pattern a month after President Trump took office: They say the department seems to be cutting breaks to people who seem loyal to the president.

In recent weeks, the department dropped a case against former Nebraska Republican Congressman Jeff Fortenberry. Prosecutors in Nashville withdrew from an investigation against Republican Congressman Andy Ogles, who introduced a bill that would clear the way for Trump to serve a third term in office. And last Friday, the Justice Department moved to dismiss the case against New York Mayor Eric Adams. Adams is a Democrat but has said he’s open to cooperating with Trump’s immigration policies, including on deportations.

Stephen Saltzburg, a Justice Department veteran from the Reagan and Bush 41 eras, says the word “alarm” is an understatement about what’s happening at the department: Prosecutors seem to be backing away from cases against people with ties to President Trump.

“They’re patterns that we haven’t really seen in the past actions of the Department of Justice,” he said. “And none of the patterns inspire a lot of confidence that the department is being evenhanded in its approach to cases.”

Saltzburg says this started on Inauguration Day with Trump’s clemency for more than 1,500 people who took part in the Capitol riot. He says it looks like Trump wanted to cut those people a break because they were acting on his behalf.

Politicization at the Justice Department?

Trump himself was charged by the Justice Department in connection with that case. He was also charged by the department in another case, related to the handling of classified documents. Prosecutors dropped both sets of charges after Trump won the November election. Since then, prosecutors abandoned their obstruction case against two of his aides at the Mar-a-Lago resort who allegedly helped him hide the classified documents from the FBI.

Trump has said he viewed the department’s actions as politically motivated. That, he said, gave him an appreciation for the plight of other politicians accused of wrongdoing.

But some of the department’s actions have had stark consequences. The fallout from the Adams case is continuing: Seven prosecutors quit rather than move to drop the case; they said it looked like an unlawful quid pro quo. Adams and his lawyer flatly denied that. (Separately, four of his top aides and deputy mayors announced Monday they’re resigning.)

Peter Zeidenberg, who used to prosecute public corruption cases, says senior leaders at Justice didn’t seem to hide they were acting for political reasons to secure Adams’ cooperation with immigration agents.

“The politicization of the Justice Department seems like it’s complete,” he said.

Last month, federal prosecutors in Texas dismissed charges against a doctor accused of unlawfully sharing health records from a children’s hospital there. Prosecutors did not provide a reason for the dismissal, according to Houston Public Media.

“The United States finally agreed to drop the case against Dr. Haim, and the Court granted dismissal with prejudice, which means the federal government can never again come after him for blowing the whistle on the secret pediatric transgender program at Texas Children’s Hospital,” said his lawyer Marcella Burke. “This dismissal represents a repudiation of the weaponization of federal law enforcement and the first step in accountability for the prosecutorial misdeeds witnessed in this case.”

Justice Department sources speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal at work say the fear is that the department will on one hand move to help Trump’s friends get out of trouble, and on the other use its vast powers of investigation and prosecution against people who have criticized the president.

But Chad Mizelle, chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, said this Justice Department wants to focus on its core function of prosecuting dangerous criminals, not pursuing “politically motivated witch hunts.”

Bondi herself has said she wants to go after the weaponization of the justice system, issuing a memo on her first day at work to create a working group to do just that. To start, she seems to be focused on people who helped bring cases against Trump.

Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith wrote this week that this all seems to be “doublespeak,” part of a playbook to “weaponize DOJ law enforcement like never before” against Trump’s perceived enemies.