Grand Juries: The Resistance’s New Weapon?
- The DOJ can't indict a ham sandwich these days.That old saying doesn't ring as true as it used to now that most of the DOJ's work is just...
- It's not just cases being tossed because DOJ prosecutors weren't legally appointed to their positions.
- Former Trump personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan did manage to secure indictments (after multiple attempts) against former FBI director James Comey and current New York Attorney General Letitia James.
“`html
from teh getting-back-to-why-they-even-exist dept
Table of Contents
The DOJ can’t indict a ham sandwich these days.That old saying doesn’t ring as true as it used to now that most of the DOJ’s work is just vindictive prosecutions.
It’s not just cases being tossed because DOJ prosecutors weren’t legally appointed to their positions. This dates back to the early parts of last year when the DOJ was trying to turn anti-ICE protesters into convicted felons. Most notoriously, the government failed to secure an assault indictment against Sean Dunn, a DC resident who famously “assaulted” an ICE officer by throwing a literal sandwich at them.
Former Trump personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan did manage to secure indictments (after multiple attempts) against former FBI director James Comey and current New York Attorney General Letitia James. Those case are gone but not as the grand juries rebelled, but because the “rule of law” party ignored a lot of rules and laws.
But the trend that began last year continues: federal prosecutors are seeing their cases rejected by grand juries at historically high rates.
In 2016, the most recent year for which Jeanine Pirro and Repeated Grand jury Refusals
Former judge and staunch donald Trump ally Jeanine Pirro faced repeated setbacks in 2025 as three seperate grand juries declined to indict individuals she sought to have charged, highlighting a growing trend of resistance to politically motivated prosecutions. This pattern of grand jury refusals raises questions about public sentiment and the strength of evidence presented by prosecutors.
The Case and initial Grand Jury Response
Pirro, acting in a self-appointed role as investigator, attempted to initiate legal proceedings against an individual she accused of attacking an FBI agent. The frist grand jury convened in August 2025 refused to return an indictment, signaling a lack of sufficient evidence or willingness to pursue the charges.
Subsequent Grand Jury decisions
Prosecutors, seemingly undeterred by the initial rejection, presented the case to a second and then a third grand jury. Each time, the grand juries reached the same conclusion: refusing to issue the indictment sought by the prosecution. this repeated failure to secure an indictment is unusual and suggests a significant hurdle in the case.
Implications and Public Reaction
The repeated grand jury refusals have fueled criticism from Trump supporters, like Pirro, who attribute the outcomes to public resistance rather than deficiencies in the evidence or the prosecution’s approach. This narrative reflects a broader trend of questioning the impartiality of the justice system in politically charged cases. The situation underscores the power of grand juries to act as a check on prosecutorial overreach and the importance of public perception in the pursuit of justice.
Grand Jury System Overview
A grand jury is a group of citizens convened to determine whether there is enough evidence to bring criminal charges against a person. The United States Courts website details the process and function of grand juries within the federal system. Unlike a trial jury, a grand jury does not determine guilt or innocence; it solely assesses whether sufficient probable cause exists to proceed with a trial. Grand jury proceedings are typically confidential.