Last month, a sitting U.S. governor accused Donald Trump of being “the most corrupt president in American history”. The accusation came in response to Trump allegedly directing the Justice Department to investigate Governor Gavin Newsom and his family, a charge that is difficult to dismiss outright, because if true, it signals something far more alarming than ordinary political mudslinging. Trump is no stranger to accusations like these, but when a sitting president is accused of turning, as Newsom put it, “the levers of government into his own personal power ministries,” the question is no longer just about the president himself. It is about the state of the Justice Department. 

In a video statement this month, Governor Newsom claimed that after calling for his arrest last year, “Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate” him and his wife, Jennifer Newsom. According to Newsom, the Justice Department has “not found a crime” yet is “simply trying to find one.” While it is unclear what exactly the president directed the DOJ to probe for, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Sacramento seems to be focused on the tax filings of Jennifer Newsom, with investigators examining evidence suggesting personal use of nonprofit funds. 

A showdown on a public stage between the executive branch and a political official is not uncommon under the second Trump administration. In fact, in Governor Newsom’s video statement, he compared himself to other “Trump foes” who have been targeted by the Trump administration. This list of political adversaries consists of former FBI Director James Comey, former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Of those, the investigation into Schiff has not yielded formal charges, and the probe into Powell was dropped entirely in April without any charges being filed.

The DOJ did indict Letitia James, but that indictment was thrown out in November. And after an earlier indictment of James Comey was also thrown out, the DOJ indicted him a second time in April over a 2025 social media post allegedly threatening Trump — with his trial now scheduled for October 21, 2026. Among these high-profile targets, very few convictions have prevailed, suggesting a pattern. As a result, critics say that the Justice Department is functioning less as an independent institution and more as an instrument of executive grievance, or in other words, an institutional arm that the executive branch can wield for personal gain. 

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — Trump’s former personal attorney — did not deny, when asked, that after Trump called for Newsom’s arrest, he then ordered an investigation into him and his family. Blanche had previously told reporters that it is “appropriate” for the president to direct investigations. 

Zooming out and considering the intended function of the DOJ—which is to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights— its legal judgments are supposed to be somewhat insulated from political influence. But this seems to be the new normal, at least when taking into account President Trump’s history of calling for “retribution” on the campaign trail. 

Perhaps what is most concerning about this particular facet of the current political arena is that when a president uses the machinery of justice to go after opponents, and those opponents fire back with accusations of corruption, the public is left to referee a match in which both sides are not wholly reliable sources of the truth. These political matches yield legitimate legal concerns that get dismissed as partisan grievance.

Therefore, while Gavin Newsom may be a flawed messenger, the message itself still demands an answer. At what point does a president’s authority to direct federal law enforcement become an abuse of that authority? And who, in a system this compromised, gets to decide?