The U.S. Department of Justice has made efforts in the past to avoid public investigations of officials that could sway elections.

The FBI raid at U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar’s Laredo dwelling made for a damning drama: a swarm of brokers descending upon his property with a warrant in hand, rising later with a computer and plastic bins and bags full of private belongings.

Those optics aren’t an afterthought for the U.S. Department of Justice. Nor is the timing — which in Cuellar’s case got here lower than two months earlier than the March 1 main election. That poor political timing has raised questions amongst authorized specialists about why the Justice Department, which had to log off on such an investigation, didn’t authorize the raid both months earlier than this main or later in the spring to reduce impression on the election.

“In common, the division has shied away from taking any overt investigative actions towards political figures when an election is looming,” stated former Justice Department official Emily Pierce. Pierce and different former division officials instructed The Texas Tribune that the Justice Department is often delicate to the devastating energy of these photos that can cloud a candidate’s repute earlier than that particular person can defend themselves in the authorized system.

The shadow of a prison investigation is hard for any elected official to navigate. But Cuellar additionally occurs to be in the combat for his political life in his South Texas Democratic main, the place he’s up for his tenth time period in Congress, and dealing with challengers Jessica Cisneros, an lawyer, and Tannya Benavides, an educator.

Cuellar hasn’t been charged with against the law, and he stated in a public assertion that he’s assured the investigation will clear him of wrongdoing. Furthermore, he’s pressured that he’s all in on the main race and intends to win reelection.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to remark for this story, as did Cuellar’s representatives.

Six former Justice Department staff interviewed by the Tribune stated the most typical cause for an investigation so shut to an election was concern of a unbroken crime, like destruction of proof or a flight threat.

“The causes they may determine to contravene that coverage embody an affordable concern that proof could be misplaced or destroyed, indications that a topic is perhaps attempting to depart the nation or anything that would possibly impair the future of the investigation in the event that they don’t act in a well timed method,” Pierce stated.

“Without understanding the specifics of the case, it’s not possible to say whether or not they feared some prison intent to destroy proof or whether or not there was a extra benign cause they felt that they had to act rapidly,” she added.

To be certain, it’s attainable the investigation could by no means yield expenses.

“We mustn’t presume that against the law has occurred right here or that the authorities is satisfied that against the law has occurred,” Edward Loya Jr., a Dallas-based lawyer, stated in an e mail. Loya served in the division’s Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption circumstances throughout the nation.

“All we all know for positive is that the authorities is gathering data it wants to make an evaluation of the allegations with which it has been introduced,” he added.

John Bash, a protection lawyer who has labored at the Justice Department each in Washington and as a U.S. lawyer in Texas, stated the division operated below “a rule of thumb” in which the Justice Department avoids indictments and overt investigative exercise like searches 60 to 90 days earlier than an election.

“None of that means that sitting members of Congress are above the regulation, however there’s an curiosity in ensuring DOJ’s position isn’t political and … DOJ just isn’t perceived as being concerned in politics,” he stated.

There’s precedent for a way the Justice Department handles investigations into political figures and in addition the way it’s fumbled in the past.

Democrats stay deeply embittered with the FBI from 2016 and former director James Comey’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s dealing with of categorised data by method of a non-public e mail server.

Comey took unprecedented actions as Clinton was operating for president, outlining in July 2016 how she and her workers have been “extraordinarily careless,” however not prison. Typically, the division doesn’t clarify why it chooses not to indict.

Then 11 days earlier than the election as voters have been already casting early voting ballots, Comey introduced he was reopening the investigation into Clinton primarily based on new proof recovered, solely to announce on the Sunday earlier than Election Day that the FBI’s advice to not prosecute stood.

Many Democrats — and pollsters — level to that second as crucial to Clinton’s loss.

Years later, former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates testified earlier than the Senate Judiciary Committee in a 2020 listening to on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. She mentioned how her workplace took particular care to avoid the look of political interference in an election as her workplace investigated Trump marketing campaign official Paul Manafort. Manafort was later convicted of tax fraud, financial institution fraud and failure to disclose a international checking account. He was pardoned by President Donald Trump in late 2020, simply earlier than he left workplace.

Yates described giving orders to the FBI to guarantee “they weren’t doing something publicly with respect to Mr. Manafort, regardless that he was now not even with the marketing campaign at this level … as a result of that could be unfair to then-candidate Donald Trump.”

“We didn’t take any motion, whether or not it was a case involving an area sheriff or a governor or a senator,” Yates stated at the listening to. “We wouldn’t take any motion that could doubtlessly have an effect on the election. … It’s not simply to be truthful to that particular person, but additionally to guarantee that the public has confidence that this energy just isn’t getting used to impression an election.”

Notably, the FBI raid on Cuellar’s home comes throughout a Democratic administration.

“Given in the present day’s political local weather and Congressman Cuellar’s highly effective place in Congress, I might be shocked if the Attorney General’s workplace weren’t consulted,” Loya stated.

This article initially appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/02/01/henry-cuellar-fbi-raid-election/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and fascinating Texans on state politics and coverage. Learn extra at texastribune.org.