The former head of the FBI in Chicago accused the Trump administration of pressuring him to investigate the president’s political opponents and of making him a “scapegoat” after the failure of a major federal case against anti-ICE protesters.
Douglas DePodesta, who served as Special Agent in Charge of the FBI from 2024 to July 2026, alleged in a federal lawsuit filed Monday that the Department of Justice (DoJ) engaged in “misconduct” and “malfeasance” in its unjust prosecutions — and that he was wrongly blamed for the DoJ’s missteps and illegally forced from his post.
The suit names Kash Patel, the director of the FBI; Todd Blanche, the attorney general; and Andrew Boutros, the U.S. attorney who heads the DoJ’s Chicago office.
DePodesta’s complaint alleges that Boutros initiated “politically motivated prosecutions” against protesters that turned into an “unprecedented disaster” for the Justice Department and accuses the U.S. Attorney of “intentionally” making false statements to a judge.
DePodesta’s trial provides rare first-hand testimony from a senior FBI official about the fallout from the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to criminally charge left-wing activists, even when the charges are disputed by law enforcement officials.
During Operation Midway Blitz, ICE’s intense crackdown on Chicago last year, Boutros repeatedly pressured DePodesta to launch “politically motivated” investigations, according to the suit.
On one occasion, Boutros was “openly hostile” when the FBI refused to write an affidavit claiming that a protester had “assaulted” a police officer after the FBI reviewed the video, which showed there had been only “accidental touching following the attack on the protester by the federal immigration agent,” the complaint states.
“On other occasions, Boutros sent emails to DePodesta demanding that DePodesta open FBI investigations into individuals with political views or affiliations opposed to the Trump Administration,” the complaint continues.
The prosecution centers on the dramatic collapse of the DoJ’s criminal case against six activists who were protesting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in the Chicago suburb of Broadview in September 2025. The activists, known as the Broadview Six, were charged with conspiring to obstruct an ICE agent, and the case dragged on for months before prosecutors were forced to dismiss the case after a series of missteps.
A grand jury initially dismissed charges presented by federal prosecutors, an extremely rare outcome because the standard of proof is low in these proceedings, with grand juries typically presenting indictments requested by the DoJ. Even after grand jurors expressed skepticism about the charges after viewing the footage, prosecutors returned to the grand jury to continue pursuing the indictment, with Boutros himself appearing in court to seek charges, DePodesta’s lawsuit says.
Boutros had publicly suggested the accusations were not politically motivated, with his office saying he had not communicated with Justice Department headquarters about the matter, according to the lawsuit. But DePodesta said those claims were false and that he himself attended two meetings in which Boutros discussed the Broadview Six with Justice Department officials, including a meeting with Patel and Blanche.
DePodesta’s lawsuit suggests that the U.S. attorney’s office was particularly pressured by the Trump administration to file charges against Kat Abughazaleh, an activist who was then running for Congress.
A judge later concluded that prosecutors engaged in misconduct during the grand jury proceedings. Boutros told the court at the time that he was “completely unaware” of the issues, but DePodesta’s complaint says the U.S. attorney was aware of the misconduct and that his remarks to the judge were “intentionally false.”
After the failed case, Boutros faced “public humiliation,” according to the lawsuit. “To distract attention from his own misdeeds, Boutros launched a campaign within the Justice Department to accuse DePodesta of being responsible for unraveling the case. »
“Despite knowing that the case was dismissed due to irregularities committed by those under Boutros’ supervision and by Boutros himself,” the lawsuit continues, “Boutros repeatedly complained to his superiors in Washington that DePodesta was responsible for the disintegration of the Broadview Six case.”
Boutros falsely accused DePodesta of conspiring with his sister-in-law, Nancy DePodesta, to destroy the business, according to the lawsuit. Defense attorney Nancy DePodesta represented one of the six Broadview defendants.
DePodesta told his superiors that he did not discuss the matter with his sister-in-law and that senior FBI officials supported him, but were ultimately pressured to force DePodesta out of his position, according to the suit.
DePodesta, who had worked at the FBI since 2002, resigned in July. At the time, the FBI, in response to an article about his departure, wrote on X.com: “Anyone who is not a member of THIS FBI under President Trump…is free to leave.” » This message, according to the lawsuit, was a “false and defamatory explanation of his dismissal.”
The suit alleges defamation and violations of due process and free speech rights.
DePodesta’s lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for information.
In an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, DePodesta said: “The American people need to know what is going on in their government…I will not let fear silence me. »
Spokespeople for the DoJ, Boutros and the FBI did not respond to requests for information.
Trump-appointed Justice Department leaders across the United States have faced scrutiny for championing flimsy cases that aligned with the president’s agenda and ultimately ended in failure. Boutros’ lawsuit notes that only about 6 percent of the prosecutions Boutros filed against anti-ICE protesters during Operation Midway Blitz resulted in guilty verdicts — “an unprecedented failure rate” for his office.
Gn usa
