Justice Department opens criminal probe related to E. Jean Carroll lawsuits

What This is

• The Justice Department has been reported to open a criminal probe tied to E. Jean Carroll’s civil lawsuits against President Donald Trump, while the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago has publicly denied opening such an investigation.
• Several accounts describe the inquiry as examining whether Carroll committed perjury in a 2022 deposition when she denied receiving outside funding for her litigation.
• Other reporting frames the probe as focused on American Future Republic, a Chicago-linked nonprofit associated with LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, over funding that helped pay some of Carroll’s legal expenses.
• One account says the nonprofit-focused investigation is examining potential offenses including money laundering, conspiracy, and obstruction related to how litigation funding moved.
• Sources described in multiple outlets say Carroll herself is not currently the target, even as the probe relates to her testimony and case funding.
• Multiple summaries note Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche recused himself because of prior involvement with Trump-related matters, and the referral is being handled through senior Justice Department channels and Chicago federal prosecutors.
• The probe follows civil jury verdicts holding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and awarding Carroll tens of millions of dollars in damages.
• The reported inquiry has immediate political spillover, including Democratic plans to force Senate votes criticizing perceived Justice Department politicization and Republican debate over an “anti-weaponization” funding proposal.

Why This Matters

• Criminal investigations connected to a sexual-assault accuser’s civil case can deter reporting and participation in the courts if people fear retaliation for suing powerful figures.
• How the Justice Department chooses targets and venues in politically sensitive matters affects public trust that criminal law is enforced consistently rather than used as punishment.
• Scrutiny of third-party litigation funding tests where lawful support ends and illegal financial conduct begins, shaping how survivors and plaintiffs can afford high-stakes cases.
• Recusals and supervision choices are a stress test for conflict-of-interest safeguards meant to separate prosecutors from personal or political entanglements.