Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Justice Department officials say prosecution decisions and threat investigations remain case‑by‑case
Loading...
Summary
At a DOJ event accompanying Rob Cicada’s confirmation, the deputy attorney general said the department reviews prosecution decisions case‑by‑case, declined to predict jury outcomes in an indictment mentioned during questioning, and noted that investigations of threats involve the FBI, Secret Service and U.S. Attorney's offices.
During a question‑and‑answer session at the Department of Justice event, the deputy attorney general said the department is not changing its approach to prosecutions as a blanket policy but evaluates each case on its facts and litigation posture.
When asked whether the Justice Department would reconsider how it approaches cases that disarm people who are regular users of marijuana or who have nonviolent drug convictions, the deputy attorney general said, "Every case is different" and that decisions depend on the stage of litigation and the specific facts. He described ongoing reviews of individual cases and said such work requires consultation with litigation teams in district courts and courts of appeal.
Reporters asked about a recent shooting in which a Secret Service officer was struck. The deputy attorney general declined to comment on investigative specifics and said it would be inappropriate to speculate; he listed the agencies involved in the probe as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina and said that charging decisions will follow the investigation.
On a question about whether posting a series of numbers (referred to in questioning as "8647") could expose someone to investigation or criminal charges, the deputy attorney general said threat cases are fact‑dependent and that similar posts do not automatically produce criminal charges without the full investigative context. He warned that threatening the president is a crime but that charging decisions depend on investigative findings.
Asked whether the department could predict outcomes in a recently returned two‑count indictment (a case mentioned in questioning), the deputy attorney general said it is inappropriate for prosecutors to predict what a jury will do and noted only that defendants have the right to defend themselves in court.
The department’s remarks emphasized that decisions about prosecutions and threat investigations rely on evidence and on ongoing work by investigative partners rather than blanket policy pronouncements.
