New York Attorney General Letitia James is facing renewed scrutiny after a Justice Department probe into her office led to a controversial move by the weapons and national security unit overseeing alleged “misconduct.” The group’s director, Ed Martin, sent a letter last week to James’ attorney urging her resignation, bypassing multiple steps federal prosecutors normally undertake to determine whether there is criminal activity. James’ legal team says the move violates Justice Department norms and ethics rules.
The investigation that sparked the letter centers on civil rights matters tied to James’ office, including a business fraud case against former President Donald Trump and an ongoing corruption inquiry into the National Rifle Association. Trump and his eldest sons were found liable last year for fraud related to inflating Trump’s net worth, a ruling now on appeal. James also secured a $4 million judgment against NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre after a jury found misappropriation of donor funds to fund luxury items for executives.
Martin is reportedly also examining two properties James owns in New York and Virginia. The inquiries come as part of a broader political clash, with Trump promising to pursue perceived adversaries and tapping Martin to help lead that effort.
In his letter, Martin argued that James’ resignation would serve the national interest, writing that “Her resignation from office would give the people of New York and America more peace than proceeding. I would take this as an act of good faith.” Just days after sending the letter, Martin appeared outside James’ Brooklyn home in a trench coat, posing for photographers in what colleagues described as a staged episode. He later told news outlets he was simply inspecting property, a move neighbors said could violate Justice Department protocol. DOJ officials declined to comment, and Martin did not respond to requests for comment. James’ outside counsel, Abbe Lowell, condemned Martin’s conduct as evidence that he was not pursuing a serious investigation.
Lowell accused Martin of acting without evidence or legal grounding, stating in a letter that Martin was pursuing “revenge” on political grounds. He also noted that the DOJ has firm policies against using investigations and prosecutorial power for political ends.
What to watch next:
– How the department responds to the concerns about procedure and ethics raised by James’ team.
– Whether the investigations yield new evidence or lead to formal charges or civil actions.
– Any further public statements from James, Martin, or their respective teams regarding the propriety and scope of the probe.
Summary: The clash centers on a letter urging resignation amid DOJ scrutiny of James’ office, with critics arguing the probe has been mishandled and politicized, while supporters emphasize accountability and due process. The case sits at the intersection of high-profile civil rights probes, political rivalries, and ongoing litigation involving Trump and the NRA. A clearer path forward from the DOJ and James’ office could help restore confidence in the integrity of action taken during investigations.
Possible hopeful angle: If the process remains grounded in established norms and due process, this episode could reinforce the importance of independent investigations free from political influence, underscoring a shared commitment to the rule of law even in highly charged political disputes.