Investigate Whether Trump DOJ “Non-Prosecution” Decisions Reflect Corruption

As your constituent, I am asking you to investigate troubling issues of corruption and improper influence raised in recent reporting concerning the Justice Department’s decision to abandon bribery-related charges against India’s richest man, Gautam Adani. A federal judge ordered prosecutors to explain their rationale because the explanation provided was “terse” and “bland,” and the judge directed the government to offer “sufficient factual support” for dismissing the case. Reporting indicates that prosecutors sought dismissal with prejudice—meaning the charges cannot be brought again—and that the government’s motion did not cite an alleged $10 billion investment offer as justification. The timeline described in the reporting is especially concerning: after a letter seeking dismissal was filed, two Justice Department lawyers reportedly withdrew from the case, suggesting internal disagreement with the decision. Multiple outlets also report that Adani’s lawyer told the Justice Department the client could invest $10 billion in the United States if the case were dropped. While the government did not rely on that offer in its written request, the very existence of such negotiations raises serious questions about whether enforcement decisions are being shaped by economic promises rather than facts and law. This pattern is not isolated. In another case, a judge criticized the Justice Department for seeking dismissal of bribery charges against Eric Adams based on theories about interfering with a political agenda, describing the rationale as “unprecedented and breathtaking.” Experts say judges have increasingly pushed back on non-prosecution decisions and are scrutinizing the government’s justifications. I urge you to launch oversight—through hearings, document requests, and interviews with relevant officials—to determine: (1) why the charges were abandoned, (2) what internal approvals and communications occurred, (3) whether any investment or other benefits were discussed in connection with dismissing charges, and (4) whether political or improper considerations played a role. As Senators Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal wrote in a letter to Todd Blanche, the acting U.S. attorney general, that the decision to drop charges “raises serious questions about corruption under President Trump.”