Investigation Launched into Jack Smith’s Handling of Trump Cases

An investigation has been initiated by the Office of Special Counsel into Jack Smith, the former special counsel who led the inquiry into Donald Trump prior to his return to office. This action follows a request from Republican Senator Tom Cotton, who raised concerns regarding Smith’s conduct, particularly in relation to the timing of trial dates in cases against Trump.

The Office of Special Counsel confirmed the investigation on February 3, 2025, focusing on a potential violation of the Hatch Act. This law restricts federal employees from using their official positions to engage in political activities. Senator Cotton contended that Smith’s efforts to expedite trial dates in the two criminal cases involving Trump were aimed at influencing the upcoming 2024 election.

Unusual Circumstances Surrounding the Investigation

This investigation is notable for several reasons. The most significant penalty for a Hatch Act violation is dismissal from federal employment, yet Smith had already departed government service at the beginning of the year. Additionally, the types of prosecutorial decisions that Cotton, Trump, and others have criticized differ from the typical cases handled by the Office of Special Counsel, which primarily addresses issues related to civil service regulations.

Recent complaints from attorneys representing dismissed federal employees have highlighted concerns that the Office of Special Counsel is not meeting its traditional responsibilities. In February 2025, President Trump dismissed the agency’s leader, Hampton Dellinger, despite federal regulations stating that the head of the agency can only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” At that time, Dellinger was advocating for the reinstatement of numerous probationary workers who had been terminated by the new administration.

The investigation into Jack Smith adds another layer to the ongoing scrutiny of federal employees and their political involvement. As the 2024 election approaches, the implications of this inquiry could resonate beyond the legal ramifications, potentially influencing public perception and political discourse.

Smith’s actions, particularly in relation to Trump’s legal challenges, continue to be a focal point for political debate, and the outcome of this investigation may further shape the narrative surrounding the former president’s legal battles in the lead-up to the election.