Full Breakdown
DOJ Investigations of Democratic Officials Spark Claims of Political Retaliation
6/22/2026, 10:40:25 PM
California Governor Gavin Newsom’s Federal Probe
The Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation into Governor Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom in 2025. The probe, managed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Sacramento, focuses on “behested payments” – contributions solicited by elected officials for favored causes – and on tax records linked to nonprofits tied to Siebel Newsom. A fact sheet released by the governor’s office states that federal agents have subpoenaed records and conducted interviews covering several years. The investigation also examines the conduct of former chief of staff Dana Williamson, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, filing a false tax return, and lying to the FBI. Additional scrutiny involves a $20 million state diaper-contract awarded to Baby2Baby, whose co-CEO sits on the board of the California Partners Project, a nonprofit founded by Siebel Newsom, and a state fine for late campaign-finance disclosures related to donations solicited from entities doing business with California.
Minnesota Officials’ Subpoenas and Judicial Rejection
In early 2026, the DOJ issued grand-jury subpoenas to Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Attorney General Keith Ellison, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, and county boards in Ramsey and Hennepin. The subpoenas sought records on whether state officials had obstructed federal immigration enforcement during the Trump administration’s “Operation Metro Surge.” U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz ruled the subpoenas unconstitutional, describing them as “efforts to coerce Minnesota officials into assisting the federal government with enforcing civil immigration laws and to harass and retaliate against them for failing to do so.” He found “overwhelming” evidence that the subpoenas were issued for political retaliation rather than a legitimate criminal investigation.
Background: DOJ Actions Under the Trump Administration
Multiple sources note a pattern of DOJ investigations targeting political opponents of former President Donald Trump. Reported targets include former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Senator Adam Schiff, and Governor Gavin Newsom. Critics argue that the DOJ’s use of grand-jury powers in these cases reflects a broader strategy of leveraging criminal investigations for political pressure.
Official Statements & Responses
- Governor Newsom asserted, “After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me,” and framed the probe as a “witch hunt” linked to his prospective 2028 presidential campaign.
- First Partner Siebel Newsom described the investigation as “overreach” and warned of “no boundaries” to Trump’s actions.
- Governor Walz called the judge’s decision “a victory for the rule of law and our democracy.”
- DOJ spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre (as cited by Forbes) said the department “takes the unlawful obstruction of federal law-enforcement operations extremely seriously.”
- The DOJ declined comment on Newsom’s request for the release of investigative records.
Criticism & Opposition
Opinion editor Joel Pollak (The California Post) questioned the political motive of the investigations and highlighted the “behested payments” issue, noting that Newsom was fined for failing to report such contributions. Senator Adam Schiff warned of “terrible abuse” by the DOJ, emphasizing that even investigations of non-supporters can be misused. Legal analysts cited the lack of a specific statutory charge in the Minnesota subpoenas as evidence of political intent.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources diverge on the origin of the Newsom probe: Fox Business reports that Newsom blames Trump, while the Press Democrat notes that part of the investigation began under the Biden administration and was later expanded by a California U.S. attorney’s office. No public charging document or statutory citation has been released for either the California or Minnesota investigations, leaving the precise legal basis unclear.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We don't know whether these investigations are politically motivated or not,” — Joel Pollak, Opinion Editor, The California Post
- “After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me,” — Gavin Newsom, Governor of California (video statement)
- “The Department is not conducting a criminal investigation, but is instead using the grand jury process for other (unlawful) purposes,” — Patrick Schiltz, U.S. District Judge
- “The U.S. Justice Department is pursuing criminal investigations into the President's political opponents,” — Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota
- “Initiating a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action—particularly official action that the federal government cannot directly require those political opponents to take—is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use of the grand-jury process,” — Patrick Schiltz, U.S. District Judge
- “I’m not saying that there can never be merit to an investigation… even when it involves someone who is not a fan of the president,” — Adam Schiff, U.S. Senator
What’s Next
The DOJ may appeal Judge Schiltz’s ruling, potentially seeking new subpoenas against Minnesota officials. The California investigation remains active, with the governor’s legal team demanding full disclosure of the DOJ’s evidence. Both cases are expected to influence public perception of the upcoming 2028 presidential race and may prompt congressional oversight of the DOJ’s investigative authority.
