adminNew York Attorney General Letitia James was indicted this month on charges of bank fraud and making false statements tied to the purchase and reporting of a Virginia property, and she has pleaded not guilty as the case moves forward in federal court. The indictment is a sharp development for a sitting state attorney general who has spent years prosecuting others while insisting her office stands above politics.
For years James led the charge against former President Donald Trump, pursuing civil litigation that culminated in a multimillion-dollar judgment before the appeals process unraveled parts of that ruling. Now the same official who demanded accountability from others is reflexively claiming victimhood, refusing to accept responsibility even as a grand jury found probable cause to return charges.
James and her allies loudly denounced the indictment as “weaponization” and political retribution, pointing to President Trump’s public calls for prosecutions of his adversaries. Yet it was those public attacks and a referral by federal officials that helped set this probe in motion, raising the uncomfortable question conservatives have long asked: when accountability comes, do the rules suddenly change?
Americans who believe in equal justice under law should be skeptical of double standards on both sides of the aisle. Democrats celebrated aggressive postures from state attorneys general when Trump was the target; when the spotlight swings to one of their own, suddenly the narrative is “political persecution.” That selective outrage corrodes public trust and makes a mockery of the notion that law enforcement is blind to power.
Letitia James’s legal team says paperwork errors and remedial fixes explain any discrepancies on loan documents, and she has pleaded not guilty — as every defendant has the right to do. But pleading not guilty is not the same thing as taking responsibility, and Americans deserve straight answers about why a public official who prosecuted others now faces criminal allegations of her own. The legal process will sort the facts, but public leaders should meet scrutiny with transparency, not deflection.
This episode should also be a wake-up call against the weaponization of justice in politics, no matter which team is doing the aiming. If James abused the power of her office to pursue partisan ends, she must be held accountable; if she is innocent, she should welcome a speedy, transparent resolution to clear her name. The conservative case for the rule of law is simple: it must be applied equally, not used as a cudgel by the politically powerful.
In the end, the lesson for all elected officials is plain — Americans will not tolerate hypocrisy wrapped in righteous rhetoric. Elected prosecutors who wage crusades against political opponents cannot complain when investigators turn a bright light back on them; they must either accept the consequences or step aside. The nation needs steady, impartial justice, not partisan theater, and it’s time our institutions delivered that standard to every corner of the political class.
