The prosecution of former President Donald Trump for the unauthorized retention of classified documents has raised concerns about the use of deadly force by law enforcement during the raid on his Mar-a-Lago residence. While the use of deadly force is authorized under standard operating procedure for felony search warrants, questions arise about its appropriateness in this case.
As a former U.S. Attorney, I can attest that the use of deadly force in a felony search warrant is standard operating procedure. However, the application of this protocol to the raid on former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence has sparked controversy.
It is both shocking and disconcerting to imagine the potential consequences had someone taken up arms during the raid. The fact that a SWAT team was authorized to use deadly force against a former President, who had active legal counsel and 24/7 Secret Service protection, raises serious questions about the discretion and awareness exercised by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
The DOJ and FBI had the autonomy to execute the search warrant when President Trump was out of town. They also had the discretion to give notice and conduct the search without deploying SWAT tactics and the accompanying "use of deadly force" protocol. So why did they not show restraint and avoid a potentially dangerous situation?
President Trump has pleaded not guilty to the indictment, but the discovery process has brought to light the controversial "deadly force" language. As someone who has prosecuted and defended federal cases involving national security issues, I can affirm that raids like these are rarely employed when the target is represented and in communication with the DOJ. In fact, the DOJ has historically preferred to avoid such confrontational methods when cooperation is possible.
Despite this preference, Attorney General Merrick Garland personally authorized the search warrant in response to allegations from the National Archives that classified documents had not been returned. The optics of the raid were clearly meant to damage President Trump's reputation, raising concerns about political motivations.
The use of deadly force as standard operating procedure in this case is particularly troubling when it is so infrequently utilized in most white-collar investigations. The DOJ and FBI should have coordinated with Trump's attorneys, conducted a less confrontational search, and avoided the excessive use of inflammatory language.
Even high-profile individuals like O.J. Simpson were afforded professional courtesy through their attorneys when facing serious charges. Such coordination is not unprecedented, especially for prominent figures. President Trump, arguably the most high-profile person in the world, should have been treated with the same consideration.
Steven D'Antuono, the assistant director-in-charge of the FBI's Washington Field Office, expressed concern about executing the search warrant without the consent of one of Trump's lawyers. This protocol would have reduced tensions, dispelled perceptions of political bias, and avoided the inclusion of inappropriate "deadly force" language.
The entire raid on Mar-a-Lago exemplifies the weaponization of our criminal justice system for political purposes. While it is absurd to suggest an assassination attempt, the inclusion of "deadly force" language in the search warrant was reckless and underscores the excessive power granted to federal law enforcement.
It is troubling that the DOJ and FBI can selectively wield their authority, as evidenced by their choice to deploy excessive force in the search of a known non-violent former U.S. President accused of a non-violent record-keeping offense. Police and criminal justice reform advocates should be outraged by this abuse of power.
We must question the use of deadly force as standard operating procedure in this case, especially given its rarity in white-collar investigations. We are granting our law enforcement excessive and dangerous discretion, particularly in our current politically charged environment.
President Trump has been and will continue to be a target of political persecution, and this case is likely to follow him indefinitely. While the rank-and-file members of the FBI are dedicated and honorable individuals, it is the leadership of the DOJ and FBI that bears responsibility for this excessive and unnecessary show of force. They chose to exercise discretion selectively and hide behind the shield of "standard operating procedures." However, nothing about this case, the charges, or the target is standard.
