NY AG Letitia James on her indictment: a ‘desperate weaponization of our justice system’
New York state attorney general Letitia James sent out this statement on the news that she has been indicted by a federal grand jury for bank fraud after one of Trump’s US attorneys, Lindsey Halligan, personally presented the case to the grand jury.
She also posted a video of her statement on X:
This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system.
I am not fearful — I am fearless.
We will fight these baseless charges aggressively, and my office will continue to fiercely protect New Yorkers and their rights. pic.twitter.com/X9U0EsHuGM
— NY AG James (@NewYorkStateAG) October 9, 2025
“This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system. He is forcing federal law enforcement agencies to do his bidding, all because I did my job as the New York State Attorney General.
“These charges are baseless, and the president’s own public statements make clear that his only goal is political retribution at any cost. The president’s actions are a grave violation of our Constitutional order and have drawn sharp criticism from members of both parties.
“His decision to fire a United States Attorney who refused to bring charges against me – and replace them with someone who is blindly loyal not to the law, but to the president – is antithetical to the bedrock principles of our country. This is the time for leaders on both sides of the aisle to speak out against this blatant perversion of our system of justice.
“I stand strongly behind my office’s litigation against the Trump Organization. We conducted a two-year investigation based on the facts and evidence – not politics. Judges have upheld the trial court’s finding that Donald Trump, his company, and his two sons are liable for fraud.
“I am a proud woman of faith, and I know that faith and fear cannot share the same space. And so today I am not fearful, I am fearless, and as my faith teaches me, no weapon formed against me shall prosper. We will fight these baseless charges aggressively, and my office will continue to fiercely protect New Yorkers and their rights. And I will continue to do my job.”
Key events
Closing summary
We’re wrapping up our live coverage of US politics for today, another day of extraordinary news on multiple fronts:
-
Even as a Trump-brokered ceasefire to end the war in Gaza moved forward, and both Israelis and Palestinians were celebrating, Trump’s Justice Department moved forward with a criminal prosecution of one of his longtime political foes, New York attorney general Letitia James, who previously sued Trump and his business for civil fraud and won, initially securing a roughly $500m penalty.
-
A federal grand jury in Virginia has now returned an indictment charging James with one count of bank fraud and one count of making a false statement to a lending institution, after an investigation that centered on paperwork for properties she owns in Virginia and New York.
-
Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s newly appointed US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia, personally presented the case to the grand jury on Thursday, a very unusual move for a US attorney.
-
News outlets noted that the Trump administration last month pushed out Erik Siebert, the veteran prosecutor who had overseen both investigations for months and had resisted pressure to file charges, and replaced him with Halligan, a White House aide who has worked as lawyer for Trump but has never previously served as a federal prosecutor.
-
Siebert had resigned on 19 September, hours after Trump told reporters: “I want him out.” Siebert believed the evidence against Comey and James was weak, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters at the time.
-
James, who will continue in her elected role, vowed to fight the charges, calling the case a“desperate weaponization of our justice system.” Prominent Democratic officials, including New York’s governor, issued messages of support, while civil rights groups attacked what they also called a weaponization of the justice system.
-
Meanwhile, a federal judge in Illinois issued a temporary restraining order blocking the deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago, saying in court that there was no evidence of a rebellion brewing in Illinois and that the Department of Homeland Security’s “narrative of events is simply unreliable.”
-
In a similar case unfolding in federal court in San Francisco, challenging Trump’s deployment of troops to Portland, Oregon, appellate judges heard arguments and seemed more likely to rule in Trump’s favor, allowing the deployment of troops.
-
Meanwhile, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is slated to be announced tomorrow. Donald Trump wants to win the prize this year, but probably won’t.
It’s been a day full of legal battles over the Trump administration’s desire to send National Guard troops into the liberal cities of Chicago, Illinois and Portland, Oregon.
While a federal judge in Chicago issued an order blocking the deployment for two weeks, a three-judge panel at a federal appeals court in San Francisco on Thursday appeared likely to set aside the ruling blocking Trump’s Portland deployment, which would clear the way for hundreds of soldiers to enter that city.
At the appellate court in San Francisco, Stacy Chaffin, an Oregon assistant attorney general, echoed the language of the lower court judge who blocked Trump’s deployment, saying the president’s descriptions of Portland as riven by violence were “untethered from reality.”
But he judges questioned whether they should only consider the current circumstances or take into account more active protests earlier this year that temporarily shut down ICE’s Portland headquarters. US circuit judge Ryan Nelson, a Trump appointee, said courts should not engage in a “day-by-day” review of whether troops were needed at any given time.
On the ground in Portland tonight, outside the Ice administration building, not much is going on at the moment, the Washington Post reports, with one of their reporters noting on social media just a few minutes ago that “The crowd is small. Jack the chicken protester is there.”
The winner of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize will be announced on Friday, in a year overshadowed by a months-long campaign by Donald Trump to win what is arguably the world’s most prestigious award, Reuters reports.
Trump has been outspoken about his desire for a prize won by four of his predecessors – Barack Obama in 2009, Jimmy Carter in 2002, Woodrow Wilson in 1919 and Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. All but Carter won the award while in office, with Obama named laureate less than eight months after taking office – the same position Trump is in now.
To be sure, Trump announced the conclusion of a ceasefire and hostage deal on Wednesday, under the first phase of his initiative to end the war in Gaza.
But according to Norwegian daily VG the committee took its decision on Monday – before the announcement of the deal – and even if its five members had known about it before making their choice for this year’s award, it is unlikely they would have rushed into a decision they usually spend months debating.
Experienced Nobel-watchers have argued that a Trump win was extremely unlikely, citing what they see as his efforts to dismantle the post-World War Two international world order the Nobel committee cherishes.
After a federal judge’s order temporarily blocking Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago, the Associated Press reported, it’s not exactly clear what the troops will do now.
The lawsuit was filed Monday by Chicago and Illinois as Guard members from Texas and Illinois were on their way to a US Army Reserve Center in Elwood, southwest of Chicago. All 500 are under the U.S. Northern Command and had been activated for 60 days.
Some National Guard troops are already in Illinois, the Associated Press reported, including a small number outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Broadview.
Some slept in vans Wednesday night outside the Broadview building, near Chicago, and emerged Thursday morning on patrol behind portable fences. For weeks, the ICE site has been the site of occasional clashes between protesters and federal agents.
In granting a temporary restraining order through October 23, US district judge April Perry said the behavior of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers has prompted the protests, and deploying Guard soldiers to Broadview would “only add fuel to the fire that defendants themselves have started,” Reuters reported.
Trump administration vows to appeal temporary restraining order in Illinois
After a federal judge in Chicago temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s deployment of hundreds of National Guard soldiers in Illinois, the administration has vowed to appeal the order, Reuters reports.
“President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities and we expect to be vindicated by a higher court,” said a White House spokesperson, Abigail Jackson.
US District Judge April Perry said that permitting Guard troops in the state would only “add fuel to the fire,” after hearing more than two hours of arguments from lawyers for the U.S. government and the state of Illinois, which sued the Trump administration over the deployment. Her order will remain in effect until at least October 23.
In a social media post, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker said “Donald Trump is not a king — and his administration is not above the law. Today, the court confirmed what we all know: there is no credible evidence of a rebellion in the state of Illinois. And no place for the National Guard in the streets of American cities like Chicago.”
On Thursday evening, around the time of Perry’s ruling, about half a dozen Guard soldiers were milling around inside the gate at the ICE center in Broadview. A group of about 10 protesters were outside.
More context on the Leticia James indictment, which followed quickly on the heels of the federal justice department indicment of another person Trump has long seen as an enemy: former FBI direct Jim Comey.
-
Both the Comey and James cases followed a strikingly unconventional path toward indictment, the Associated Press notes. The Trump administration last month pushed out Erik Siebert, the veteran prosecutor who had overseen both investigations for months and had resisted pressure to file charges, and replaced him with Lindsey Halligan, a White House aide who has worked as lawyer for Trump but has never previously served as a federal prosecutor.
-
Meanwhile Reuters notes that Siebert resigned on September 19, hours after Trump told reporters: “I want him out.” Siebert believed the evidence against Comey and James was weak, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters at the time.
-
James called the decision to fire Siebert and replace him with a prosecutor who is “blindly loyal” to the president as “antithetical to the bedrock principles of our country,” and she said she stood by her investigation of Trump and his company as having been “based on the facts and evidence — not politics,” the Associated Press reports.
The City, an independent news outlet in New York, did a long podcast interview with New York attorney general Letitia James last week, if you’re interested in hearing directly from the embattled prosecutor who took on Donald Trump and won, and is now criminally charged herself.
Zohran Mamdani, the leading candidate in the New York City mayoral race, has called out rival candidate and former New York state governor Andrew Cuomo on social media for commenting on Letitia James’ indictment today without actually mentioning her name.
Cuomo resigned as governor in 2021 after an investigation led by James, the state’s attorney general, concluded that he had he sexually harassed 11 women, created a “climate of fear” in a “toxic” workplace and violated federal and state civil laws.
Cuomo repeatedly said that James’ investigation of him was politically motivated.
What’s behind today’s grand jury indictment of New York attorney Letitia James on a bank fraud charge, which is being widely condemned as a politically motivated attack? Reuters has more details:
The indictment accuses James of falsely telling a bank that she would occupy a Norfolk, Virginia, home she bought in 2020 for around $137,000 as a secondary residence. It alleges she used it as an investment property.
The indictment said the alleged misrepresentation allowed James to receive a favorable interest rate, saving her around $19,000 over the life of the loan.
“The charges as alleged in this case represent intentional, criminal acts and tremendous breaches of the public’s trust,” Lindsey Halligan, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, said in a statement.
Both charges require prosecutors to prove that James had criminal intent, meaning she knowingly provided false information to secure a financial benefit. That means an incorrect fact on documents she submitted to the bank on its own may not be enough to secure a conviction, and the defense may argue that any misrepresentations were mistakes.
As my colleague Sam Levine reports today, the case may hinge on small paperwork details, including one box checked on one document:
A grand jury empaneled earlier this year had been investigating allegations that James may have committed fraud when she helped her niece buy a home in Virginia.
On a document that was part of that transaction, there was a box checked indicating James intended to use it as her primary residence, which would make better mortgage rates available. But in other documents and emails with her mortgage broker, James clearly indicated she did not intend to use the home as her primary residence.
A career prosecutor in the eastern district of Virginia, Elizabeth Yusi, had determined there wasn’t probable cause to file mortgage fraud charges against James and had been preparing to present her thinking to Halligan.
An update from Illinois: US district judge April Perry blocked the deployment of National Guard troops in the Chicago area for two weeks, finding no substantial evidence that a “danger of rebellion” is brewing in Illinois, the Associated Press reports.
It’s a victory for Democratic officials who lead the state and city and have traded insults with President Donald Trump about his drive to put troops on the ground in major urban areas.
The lawsuit was filed Monday by Chicago and Illinois to stop the deployments of Illinois and Texas Guard members. Some troops were already at an immigration building in the Chicago suburb of Broadview when Perry heard arguments on Thursday.
The building has been the site of occasional clashes between protesters and agents.
Perry said the actions of the Department of Homeland Security are largely rooted in President Donald Trump’s “animus toward Illinois elected officials.” She expressed skepticism of the federal government’s characterization of protests in Broadview.
“DHS’s narrative of events is simply unreliable,” she said.
Heavy turnout at the downtown courthouse caused officials to open an overflow room with a video feed of the hearing. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson sat in a corner of the courtroom.
As my colleague Sam Levine notes today, Trump has made little secret of his desire to use the justice department to punish his rivals. “What about Comey, Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff, Leticia??? They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done,” he said in a September post on Truth Social that was addressed to Pam Bondi, the US attorney general. “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”
“This is what tyranny looks like,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who represents New York, said in a statement on Letitia James’ indictment. “President Trump is using the Justice Department as his personal attack dog.”
The United States is sending about 200 troops to Israel to support and help monitor the ceasefire deal in Gaza as part of a team that includes partner nations, non-governmental organizations and private-sector entities, US officials said Thursday, the Associated Press reports:
