President Donald Trump's sustained efforts to influence the Department of Justice have repeatedly backfired, undermining his own criminal cases and creating significant complications for his administration, according to New York Times legal analyst Alan Feuer.

Writing on Monday, Feuer described how Trump, upon returning to office, "muscled his way into the driver's seat at the Justice Department, leaving tread marks on its time-honored independence from the White House by demanding, and sometimes directing, investigations into his enemies. But his tight grip on the steering wheel has often threatened to lead the department off a cliff." The independence Feuer referenced reflects a norm hardened in the post-Watergate era, when formal guidelines were adopted to insulate DOJ decision-making from White House political pressure after abuses by the Nixon administration.

Feuer argued that the events of the past week illustrate how Trump's attempts to weaponize the DOJ have produced damaging consequences. The president's meddling, he wrote, "imperiled one criminal case, set the stage for sanctions in a second and gummed up the chances that his pick for attorney general will be confirmed by the Senate."

The James Comey Case

According to Feuer, Trump's latest round of DOJ troubles began last week, when court documents in the case against former FBI Director James Comey surfaced new details. Comey faces charges of threatening the president's life after posting a photograph of seashells arranged to spell "86-47." The phrase combines "86," a slang term for getting rid of something, with "47," a reference to Trump as the 47th president. The documents revealed that Trump had orchestrated a plan with the Secret Service to track Comey's phone using methods described as "legally questionable." Trump reportedly monitored the surveillance operation from Air Force One and requested the Secret Service agents' notes for use in a media appearance that evening.

"The request for the notes was a shocking breach of the distance that most presidents have kept from the day-to-day oversight of criminal investigations and indicated the intensity of Mr. Trump's personal involvement in the pursuit of Mr. Comey, one of his most reviled political adversaries," Feuer wrote. The personal animosity between the two men traces back to 2017, when Trump fired Comey as FBI director, a decision that helped trigger the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Comey's legal team has seized on the episode, arguing that the Justice Department's decision to indict him on charges of making threats against the president was purely retaliatory. "If that claim is proven true, it would result in the case being dismissed," Feuer noted. Such an outcome would invoke the doctrine of selective or vindictive prosecution, which allows courts to dismiss charges when defendants demonstrate that they were targeted for unconstitutional reasons.

The David Hearn Prosecution Collapse

Trump's interventions may have also doomed the prosecution of former Olympian David Hearn, who was charged with vandalizing the Reflecting Pool during a widely criticized renovation project earlier in the summer. On Friday, the case unraveled, in Feuer's words, "in a spectacular fashion." U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a longtime Trump loyalist, acknowledged in a court filing that new information from the Interior Department had led her to conclude that defective construction — not any actions by Hearn — was responsible for the damage to the pool's lining.

Despite that concession, Trump refused to abandon the vandalism narrative. On Saturday morning, he took to social media to publicly contradict Pirro, a veteran prosecutor and personal friend of more than four decades. "I don't know what she was thinking?" Trump wrote. The public break was notable given Pirro's history as one of Trump's most vocal defenders, including during her tenure as a primetime Fox News host before her appointment as a federal prosecutor.

Feuer observed that while Hearn's legal team has not revealed its next steps, the collapse of the prosecution provides them with a strong basis to argue that the president's persistent public statements about the case indicate the charges were "vexatious, frivolous or brought in bad faith."

The Todd Blanche Confirmation

Feuer further reported that the president's interference has disrupted another critical Justice Department matter: the effort to confirm Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal attorney, as attorney general. Blanche represented Trump in the Manhattan criminal case involving hush money payments, a proceeding that ended in a felony conviction before Trump returned to office.

By last week, Blanche appeared to have overcome the primary obstacle to his confirmation — satisfying Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Thom Tillis (R-NC), who had been blocking the nomination over Blanche's refusal to commit in writing to ending what they characterized as Trump's "slush fund."

However, as the weekend approached, Feuer wrote, "the president seemed to throw Mr. Blanche under the bus that he himself was driving, issuing a series of confusing and contradictory messages." Trump abruptly announced he would withdraw Blanche's nomination and wait until the two departing senators left office, while simultaneously reaffirming his support for the fund that Blanche had just declared defunct. The following day, Trump threatened to revive the fund if Blanche was not confirmed.

Senator Tillis expressed frustration with the reversal. "It's unfortunate that Todd Blanche, who I consider qualified for the job, will not be confirmed because of this reversal," he said, describing himself as "baffled and dispirited."

By Sunday, a potential breakthrough had emerged following what were described as "good faith discussions" with senators, potentially clearing a path for Blanche's confirmation. However, as of Monday morning, Trump had not publicly commented on the arrangement, leaving open the possibility that the plan could still be derailed by further presidential intervention.