Shortly after Donald Trump’s interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia started in his position, he launched a probe of the office’s Jan. 6 work, while the Justice Department fired prosecutors who worked on those cases against Trump supporters. Ed Martin, who was a “Stop the Steal” advocate and lawyer for Jan. 6 defendants, proceeded this week to pledge support for Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” workers, assuring Musk that he’d bring the office’s full weight to bear “against anyone who impedes your work or threatens your people.”
There’s a through-line between the two seemingly separate efforts that does well to capture the Trump administration’s approach to “law and order” in the Musk era: That is, using the law as a shield for Trump/Musk supporters and a sword against their critics.
The basis of Martin’s Jan. 6 probe, he told employees, was how the office had used an obstruction charge. The Supreme Court narrowed the DOJ’s use of the law in a divided ruling (over dissent from a Trump appointee). Although most federal judges had sided with DOJ before the high court ruling, Martin called the use of the law a “great failure” that they “need to get to the bottom of.”
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with an organization reviewing how any project was ultimately unsuccessful in retrospect. But the context of Martin’s move suggests it’s an extension of the pro-Trump work he was doing before he gained governmental power.
At any rate, his Jan. 6 probe is nominally concerned with prosecutorial overreach against political opponents.
Bear that in mind while considering his public message to Musk, posted to the billionaire’s social media platform on Monday. “We will protect DOGE and other workers no matter what,” Martin wrote, calling it important to keep American employees safe and to protect “the American people’s property.” He also bemoaned “thugs with guns [who] trashed our capital city.” (Martin was not referring to Jan. 6 defendants there.)
Separately, the federal prosecutor’s office for D.C. issued an official statement saying that an initial review showed that “certain individuals and/or groups have committed acts that appear to violate the law in targeting DOGE employees” and that the office has “our prosecutors preparing.”
Preparing what? Against whom? And what laws?
Martin didn’t specify, which can be its own problem to the extent it chills protected expression. The prosecutor’s letter followed reporting from Wired that identified “six young men — all apparently between the ages of 19 and 24, according to public databases, their online presences, and other records — who have little to no government experience and are now playing critical roles” in Musk’s crew. It is not illegal to report or publicize their identities. The Washington Post reported that Musk’s actions have “triggered legal objections across Washington, with officials in at least a half-dozen federal agencies and departments raising alarms about whether the billionaire’s assault on government is breaking the law.” Putting aside whether Musk and his staff have broken the law, if people are committing crimes against them, then prosecutors with relevant jurisdiction should take action. Indeed, that basic principle goes without saying — and usually goes unsaid. Martin’s public statements raise questions about his motivation for a public display and about whether he’s gearing up to weaponize government against people for exercising their rights, which, of course, is how he and the Trump administration have cast the Jan. 6 prosecutions. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in Donald Trump’s legal cases.
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro," a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
Latest Post
Recommended
