Instead of acting as a guardian of the law, the Justice Department will use judicial power to pursue political vendettas and silence dissent.

The US Department of Justice’s “Weaponisation Working Group” plans to name and shame individuals who can’t be prosecuted. The group was established “ to restore integrity and credibility with the public" by ending prosecution of political opponents, but is now moving to humiliate individuals who can’t be charged with a crime. This recalls the unchecked power of English Star Chamber, which was originally created in the 15th century by the Crown to try elite plaintiffs, but was later transformed to crush dissent.

Openly investigating political adversaries to publicly shame them smacks of revenge for perceived injustices and acts as a deterrent to opposition and criticism. This resembles the way that judicial authority was used as coercive power in the English Star Chamber (1485-1641) to prosecute sedition. It was first established to provide an alternative to corrupt common law courts, with considerable latitude in terms of its jurisdiction and its ability to determine appropriate remedies, in order to ensure justice. It operated first as an extension of the King’s Council, then became a court of appeal and a court of equity, capable of exercising greater flexibility than “black-letter law”. This discretion was later transformed into a political weapon controlled by the monarch to punish enemies of the Crown and regulate the press.

Justice through humiliation: ‘That’s the way things work’

The stated purpose of the Weaponisation Group was to reform the DoJ’s reputation under the Biden administration, according to MAGA politicians, for selective prosecution. Instead, the Group is actively pursuing the agenda which they are meant to fight. Ed Martin Jr., head of the Weaponisation Group, was nominated by President Trump as US Attorney for Washington, DC, but this was withdrawn following bipartisan objections that cited his lack of prosecutorial experience and conflicts of interest related to his support for 6 January defendants.

Martin recently stated that he would use a new tactic aimed at individuals suspected of wrongdoing – public humiliation: “There are some really bad actors, some people that did some really bad things to the American people. If they can be charged, we’ll charge them. But if they can’t be charged, we will name them. And we will name them, and in a culture that respects shame, they should be people that are ashamed.” This approach targets individuals, not crimes, engaging in the very same behaviour the Weaponisation Group is meant to combat. Martin concluded his announcement by saying, “that’s a fact. That’s the way things work. And so that’s, that’s how I believe the job operates”.

Naming and shaming: a winning strategy?

In 2017, FBI director James Comey was fired for naming and shaming Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. In his termination of Comey, President Trump cited a letter from Deputy Attorney-General Rod Rosenstein that said the FBI director “gratuitously” released “derogatory information” about Clinton, who was the subject of an investigation. This gratuitous disclosure occurred just 11 days before Trump’s surprise victory. Naming and shaming may have contributed to Trump’s victory. Now the same tactic is being used to punish the perceived enemies of the president whose actions do not merit prosecution.

From controlling the press to cruel and unusual punishment

Under King Charles I, the Star Chamber exercised its authority to regulate the press, and banned a series of “newsbooks”, weekly newspapers, from 1632 to 1638. The king was anxious to control how information about the Thirty Years’ War in Europe was reported in England, as well as any criticism of domestic affairs. He exercised his royal prerogative and had the Star Chamber issue a decree that banned the publication of "The Continuation of Our Weekely Newes”.

The Star Chamber also subverted its original purpose as a royal law court designed to prosecute powerful plaintiffs, and targeted individuals for sedition. From its inception, the Star Chamber had unfettered discretion to determine any punishment, except death. This prohibition did not prevent the use of intimidation and torture in investigations, or branding and mutilation as judicial penalties.

In 1637, William Prynne was found guilty of sedition for his production and distribution of Puritan pamphlets. This was not his first offence, so his punishment was severe: his ears were cut off, his nose was slit and the initials “SL”, for “Seditious Libeller”, were branded on his cheeks. The Star Chamber was abolished in 1641, but the spectre of “cruel and unusual punishment” remained enough of a concern to be addressed in the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution.

Sign of shame or badge of courage?

Just as the Star Chamber enacted decrees that limited publication and distribution of any materials that criticised the Crown, the DoJ’s Weaponisation Group is using coercive control to exact revenge, and stifle dissent. It remains to be seen whether naming and shaming in 2025 carries the same weight as it did in 2016, or if being targeted by the Weaponisation Group will be seen as a routine cost of questioning President Trump.

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.