Under any other circumstances, Attorney General Pam Bondi would fall under the Justice Department’s disciplinary processes for her Friday news conference, wrote former federal prosecutor Harry Litman.
Bondi announced the return of Maryland immigrant Kilmar Ábrego García after he was sent to a prison in El Salvador. She then said that he would be promptly arrested and charged with federal crimes. She began citing allegations from "sources" that Ábrego García allegedly helped kill someone's mother and solicited explicit images of a minor. She said he trafficked guns, drugs, women and children.
Then she said that he would only be charged with transporting an undocumented immigrant.
"This is not Bondi’s first flagrant departure from appropriate conduct in informing the public about DOJ charges," Litman said. "It’s become her MO to throw around inflammatory charges against defendants combined with fulsome and legally irrelevant praise of President [Donald] Trump."
Litman alleged that Bondi "should, and likely does, know better." Were she at the DOJ in another time, he said that the "disciplinary processes would come down hard on her."
He noted that the cornerstone of the American legal system is the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven.
"In publicly announcing charges against a defendant—which are not evidence but mere allegations—a prosecutor must restrict herself to the information set out in the grand jury indictment or other charging document, and must scrupulously characterize that information as government contentions, not proof," Litman added.
Bondi repeated allegations from what she said were other MS-13 gang members cooperating with the Trump administration.
Legal analysts commented after the press conference, noting that Bondi was doing more to help Ábrego García's defense with her comments.
"She is doing defense lawyers a favor with these prejudicial remarks," said national security lawyer Bradley Moss about Bondi's allegations.
To a seasoned prosecutor, Litman said that this would be "second nature."
"Violating them potentially carries administrative, disciplinary, judicial, and even criminal penalties," he said.
He went on to cite the rules and restrictions she violated.