On a brisk September afternoon at George Mason University, the air inside the packed lecture hall was thick with unease and anticipation. Former special counsel Jack Smith, the man who once stood at the center of two criminal cases against Donald Trump, was about to deliver his first public remarks since leaving the Justice Department. What followed was a somber warning: the rule of law, Smith declared, is under attack in America like never before in living memory.
"My career has been about the rule of law and I believe that today it is under attack like in no other period in our lifetimes," Smith told the audience of students, professors, and members of the public, according to a recording of the September 16, 2025 event later obtained by NPR and BERITAJA. His words were measured, but the emotion behind them—sadness, anger, and frustration—was unmistakable.
Smith, whose career has spanned public corruption prosecutions, war crimes investigations, and ultimately the high-wire legal battles involving both the former and current president, did not mince words. He recounted a year that had shaken the very foundations of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the broader legal system. "Today we have seen conflict between the leadership of the Justice Department and line career prosecutors like never before," he said. "And the reason is simple: because the leadership is asking those prosecutors to do things that the prosecutors know are wrong."
Smith’s speech came at a time of unprecedented turmoil inside the DOJ. Earlier in 2025, a wave of resignations swept through the ranks of career prosecutors in Manhattan after DOJ leaders moved to abandon a corruption case against New York Mayor Eric Adams. Smith pointed to this episode as a glaring example of the loss of credibility and the dangerous politicization of justice. The message was clear: long-standing norms and traditions, painstakingly built over decades to ensure equal treatment under the law, were being cast aside.
He also highlighted a series of executive orders issued by the White House, which targeted large law firms based on their clients or attorneys who had previously clashed with Donald Trump. According to Smith, these actions sent a chilling message to the legal community—one that threatened to undermine the independence and integrity of the profession.
Just days after Smith’s remarks, events in the Eastern District of Virginia would further underscore his concerns. There, the U.S. attorney who had publicly questioned cases against former FBI Director Jim Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James was abruptly forced out. In his place, the administration installed a Trump ally with no prior prosecutorial experience, a move that many saw as a stark escalation in the politicization of federal law enforcement. Smith did not reference Trump by name, but his meaning was unmistakable.
"Political opponents, critics, perceived enemies are targeted for investigation or arrest to silence them, and the prosecutors instead of investigating … cases, they're left to figure out a basis for charges after the fact," Smith warned. The implication was sobering: the machinery of justice, in his view, was being wielded not as a shield for the public good, but as a weapon against dissent.
Smith was equally alarmed by what he saw as a double standard for those close to the president. "Where the rule of law is eroding, friends of the president do not have to worry about following the same laws that the rest of us follow," he said. "Exceptions will be made. And nobody, I mean nobody, in a president's administration, or his allies, will be investigated or prosecuted, no matter what they do." His words echoed a sentiment that has reverberated through legal circles in recent months: that the principle of equal justice under law is at risk of becoming a relic.
In the face of these developments, Smith reserved his deepest respect for the career lawyers and public servants who, in his view, continue to uphold the highest standards of integrity. He noted that several Justice Department attorneys had resigned or been fired in 2025 amid mounting institutional conflicts. "It's extremely difficult to witness," Smith admitted, his voice tinged with both pride and sorrow. These departures, he suggested, were not just personal tragedies but warning signs of a system in distress.
Smith’s critique did not go unanswered. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, speaking around September 25, 2025, pushed back forcefully against accusations that President Trump was weaponizing the DOJ. "The President is fulfilling his promise to restore a Department of Justice that demands accountability, and it is not weaponizing the Department of Justice," Leavitt said, according to NPR and BERITAJA. The administration’s stance is that recent moves are about restoring order and ensuring that those who break the law are held accountable, not about settling political scores.
Yet for Smith and many of his peers, these assurances ring hollow. He argued that the current DOJ leadership, many of whom previously defended Trump in legal proceedings, have abandoned time-honored norms in favor of delivering outcomes that align with the president’s wishes. "They were hired and they're thus driven to get outcomes, no matter the cost to the credibility of the institution they represent, no matter whether those outcomes are legal, no matter whether those outcomes are just," Smith said.
This erosion of standards has had tangible effects beyond the walls of the DOJ. Smith pointed to grand juries in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles that have rejected demands for indictments amid a surge of federal immigration enforcement. Judges, too, have begun pushing back, declining search warrants and calling out prosecutors for credibility issues. For Smith, these are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a deeper malaise.
At the heart of Smith’s warning was a simple but profound principle: "Law itself must be the same for everyone but importantly it must be enforced the same for everyone." Without this, he argued, the very fabric of American democracy is at risk. Smith’s call to action was not for partisan battle, but for a renewed commitment to fairness, accountability, and the rule of law—values he believes are now in jeopardy.
As the applause faded and the crowd dispersed, the gravity of Smith’s message lingered. In a year marked by resignations, firings, and institutional upheaval, his words served as both a lament and a rallying cry for those who still believe that justice should be blind, and that no one—no matter how powerful—is above the law.