Conservative Group Warns of 'Lawfare' Against Young Trump Officials

Calls from Democratic lawmakers to investigate allies of former President Donald Trump are raising concerns about the potential for "lawfare" that could burden young professionals with steep legal bills and reputational damage, according to Rachel Bovard, vice president of programs at the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI).

Bovard's organization was subpoenaed during special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into the 2020 election, incurring millions of dollars in compliance fees, although CPI was not accused of any crime. She expressed fears that Democrats, if they gain control of Congress, could adopt a similar investigative approach.

"Jack Smith was a test run in how to do this," Bovard told Fox News Digital. "His goal was to map the right, and he did it. And all of that information is still on file at the FBI and the Justice Department. It doesn't go away, so it's sitting there waiting for the next Dem administration to pick it up."

These concerns follow remarks by Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., who stated earlier this month that she wants Democrats to send a "deterrence message" to young professionals considering roles in a future Trump administration. Slotkin indicated a desire to target not only the president but also "the people who enabled him."

Bovard characterized such tactics as using "the government as a political weapon," echoing her experience with Smith's investigation, which she stated resulted in the Justice Department obtaining irrelevant information about her organization's benefits.

Abhishek Kambli, a former federal prosecutor, commented that congressional subpoenas must be related to legislative duties and cannot be solely for law enforcement purposes. He suggested that public statements by lawmakers like Slotkin could be used as evidence to challenge the legitimacy of such subpoenas.

"You had multiple members of the House and the Senate that talk about the accountability agenda and holding the Trump administration accountable for wrongdoing," Kambli told Fox News Digital. "And if they just throw in boilerplate language that this is for legislative purpose, anyone challenging those subpoenas will have that entire record to demonstrate that it's anything but that."

Michael Morley, a law professor at Florida State University College of Law, acknowledged that Slotkin's remarks present poor optics but maintained that Congress' investigative authority remains broad, including oversight of its created agencies. He added that such discourse is not consistent with norms but may not rise to a constitutional issue.

Concerns also persist about potential Justice Department investigations into former Trump administration officials if a Democrat wins the presidency in 2028 and controls both houses of Congress, according to Kambli. He noted that the investigative process itself can be punitive, even if no prosecution ultimately occurs.

"There is no doubt that some members of Congress intend to use that process to bankrupt people who cannot afford legal representation," Kambli stated. "That is a real threat, regardless of whether anyone is ultimately prosecuted."

In light of these potential challenges, Trump has suggested he would issue preemptive pardons to administration members before leaving office, a move Bovard believes may become necessary given the rise of "lawfare."