Grand Juries Refuse Indictments in Trump DOJ Cases, Blocking 2nd-Term Pressure
Updated
Updated · NPR · Jun 1
Grand Juries Refuse Indictments in Trump DOJ Cases, Blocking 2nd-Term Pressure
11 articles · Updated · NPR · Jun 1
Grand juries have refused to indict in several recent high-profile cases, denying prosecutors charges where they said no crime had been adequately shown.
Those rebuffs have emerged as a check on President Donald Trump’s second-term push to use the Justice Department against political enemies.
Trump has installed his personal lawyer atop the department, cut career prosecutors and pressured U.S. attorneys to bring cases against targets he favors.
The standoffs suggest grand juries are serving as one of the last internal accountability mechanisms still constraining politicized prosecutions at the DOJ.
As judges and grand juries push back, are the legal system's checks on federal power working as intended?
With thousands of veteran lawyers gone, can the Justice Department effectively prosecute its most complex cases?
If the DOJ oversees its own lawyers' ethics, who ensures the agency itself is held accountable?
Grand Juries Reject DOJ in 2026: Politicized Prosecutions, Judicial Condemnation, and the Fight for Accountability
Overview
In 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice faced a wave of failures to secure indictments, especially against political opponents and protesters of the Trump administration. This crisis stemmed from President Trump’s politicization of the DOJ, where loyalty to the MAGA agenda was valued over legal expertise. As a result, many inexperienced lawyers, led by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, struggled with even basic criminal cases, turning them into chaotic and uncertain proceedings. Federal grand juries repeatedly refused to indict, highlighting the deep impact of these changes and raising serious concerns about the integrity and effectiveness of the justice system.