The Potential Risks of a Politicized FBI: What's at Stake

The Potential Risks of a Politicized FBI: What’s at Stake

​

The FBI’s Tradition of Nonpartisan Leadership

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was established in 1908 as the nation's premier law enforcement and investigative agency. Over its 117-year history, the FBI has been led by individuals with extensive experience in law enforcement, intelligence, or national security. The agency’s independence is essential for ensuring impartial enforcement of the law, free from political influence.

​

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly mention the FBI, but its structure and role are directly tied to constitutional principles, including the separation of powers and the rule of law. The Appointments Clause (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) grants the president authority to appoint high-level officials but does not permit those appointees to act as political enforcers. Additionally, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments protect due process, ensuring that law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, operate free from political interference that could result in selective prosecution or politically motivated investigations.

​

To reinforce its independence, Congress established a 10-year term limit for FBI directors in 1976, a direct response to J. Edgar Hoover’s lengthy tenure. This term was designed to prevent presidents from using the FBI as a political tool. While the deputy director position does not have a fixed term, it has historically been held by career officials with deep institutional knowledge—until now.

​

The Appointment of Dan Bongino: A Cause for Concern

On February 27, 2025, Dan Bongino, a right-wing political commentator with a background in law enforcement and the Secret Service, was appointed as Deputy Director of the FBI by newly installed FBI Director Kash Patel. Bongino, who has no prior experience within the FBI, is known for his outspoken criticism of the agency, including his characterization of it as "irredeemably corrupt" (NPR, Feb. 24, 2025). 

​

Former FBI officials have expressed alarm over the decision:

• The FBI Agents Association initially expected Patel to follow tradition by appointing a career professional to the deputy director role, only to be caught off guard by Bongino’s selection (Reuters, Feb. 27, 2025).

• David Laufman, former DOJ counterintelligence chief, cautioned that this appointment could lead the FBI to be used as a "political investigative tool" by the White House (Reuters, Feb. 27, 2025).

• Former senior FBI executives described the appointment as a departure from the agency's nonpartisan tradition and raised concerns that Bongino’s leadership might encourage politically motivated investigations (Reuters, Feb. 27, 2025).

 

These concerns highlight the risk that a politically influenced FBI leadership could undermine the agency’s independence, raising questions about the integrity of its investigations.

​

The Constitutional and Democratic Risks of a Politicized FBI

1. Equal Protection & Due Process

The Fifth Amendment states that no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" (U.S. Const. amend. V). Similarly, the Fourteenth Amendment extends this protection to state action, ensuring that "no state shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" (U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1).

If the FBI, under politically motivated leadership, selectively targets political opponents for investigation or prosecution while shielding allies, it violates procedural due process (by denying fair legal procedures) and substantive due process (by engaging in arbitrary enforcement). Additionally, politically biased law enforcement contravenes the Equal Protection Clause, which prohibits selective prosecution based on political affiliation (Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 373-74 (1886)). Courts have ruled that government agencies cannot use discriminatory enforcement to target individuals based on arbitrary or politically motivated distinctions (United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464-65 (1996)).

​

2. Checks and Balances

The separation of powers doctrine—rooted in Articles I (Legislative), II (Executive), and III (Judicial) of the U.S. Constitution—prevents any one branch of government from exercising unchecked authority. While the FBI is part of the Executive Branch, it traditionally operates with independent law enforcement discretion to avoid becoming a tool of political retribution.

If an FBI leader were to use investigative authority to target critics of the president, it would violate the Take Care Clause (U.S. Const. art. II, § 3), which requires the president and executive officials to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed" rather than used as instruments of political power. Historically, courts have warned against executive overreach in law enforcement, emphasizing that prosecutorial discretion must not be abused for political ends (Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 695 (1988)).

Moreover, Congress has legislative authority over the FBI's funding and oversight under Article I, Section 8, which grants it power to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper” for the functioning of federal agencies. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees have an explicit oversight role to ensure the FBI remains free from partisan control (5 U.S.C. §§ 101, 105).

​

3. Free and Fair Elections

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, association, and political participation (U.S. Const. amend. I). A politicized FBI that initiates selective investigations into political opponents could have a chilling effect on free expression, deterring Americans from exercising their rights for fear of government retaliation.

​

Additionally, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. §§ 10301, 10307) prohibits government actions that intimidate voters or interfere with the political process. If the FBI were to investigate opposition candidates or political organizations without legitimate cause, it could constitute unlawful voter intimidation (United States v. Tobin, 480 F.3d 53, 57 (1st Cir. 2007)). Courts have ruled that law enforcement agencies cannot be used to suppress political participation (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969)).

​

Furthermore, the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 7323-7326) restricts federal employees, including those in the FBI, from engaging in partisan political activities while on duty. If FBI leadership directs law enforcement actions to benefit a political party, it raises serious violations of the Hatch Act, as well as potential abuses of power under 18 U.S.C. § 242, which prohibits officials from depriving individuals of constitutional rights under color of law.

​

Furthermore, Bongino’s appointment follows a troubling pattern of President Trump appointing loyalists to critical institutions, including the military, raising concerns that law enforcement could be weaponized against dissenters.

​

How This Could Affect All Americans

The potential politicization of the FBI could have far-reaching consequences for every American. While it's not guaranteed, there are signs from the current appointees that suggest the agency’s independence may be at risk. If the FBI's leadership were to be influenced by political motivations, its ability to serve as an impartial enforcer of the law could be compromised. This shift could lead to biased enforcement, undermining public trust in the justice system. When law enforcement agencies are seen as politically motivated, citizens may feel less secure in their rights, knowing that their personal or political views could be targeted. The FBI's independence is critical for safeguarding civil liberties and ensuring that everyone, regardless of political affiliation, is treated fairly under the law. While it's unclear how far this trend might go, it could create a dangerous precedent that erodes public confidence in federal institutions and stirs division. In the long run, the strength of our democracy depends on an FBI free from political interference, ensuring the rule of law is upheld for all.

 

Conclusion:

The appointment of Dan Bongino as Deputy Director of the FBI signals a potential shift in the agency’s historically nonpartisan leadership, raising serious concerns about its future independence. While the full extent of the impact is not yet clear, the politicization of the FBI could undermine the constitutional and democratic values that form the foundation of our justice system. If the FBI’s leadership becomes politically motivated, it threatens core principles like due process, equal protection, and checks and balances, which safeguard individual rights and ensure fairness in governance. A politicized FBI risks eroding public trust in federal institutions and could even jeopardize free and fair elections, chilling political expression and voter participation. As this development unfolds, it calls for careful attention and action from lawmakers, the judiciary, and the American public to protect the FBI’s integrity and prevent its use as a political tool. Preserving the independence of the FBI is essential to upholding the rule of law and safeguarding the principles of democracy for future generations.

​

Constitutional and Legal Citations:

1. U.S. Constitution - Article II, Section 2, Clause 2
   The President's authority to appoint officials, including the FBI Director.
   Source: U.S. Constitution

2. U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment
   Protects due process rights, ensuring fair procedures in legal matters.
   Source: U.S. Constitution, Fifth Amendment

3. U.S. Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment
   Extends equal protection of the laws to state action, ensuring non-discriminatory enforcement of the law.
   Source: U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment

4. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)
   A landmark case that affirms the Equal Protection Clause applies to discriminatory law enforcement and selective prosecution.
   Source: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)

5. United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996)
   A case discussing how selective prosecution based on political affiliation violates the Constitution.
   Source: United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996)

6. Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988)
   Addresses executive overreach and prosecutorial discretion in law enforcement.
   Source: Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988)

7. U.S. Constitution - Take Care Clause (Article II, Section 3)
   Requires the president and executive officials to ensure the laws are faithfully executed, not used for political gain.
   Source: U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 3

8. U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8
   Grants Congress legislative authority over the FBI’s funding and oversight.
   Source: U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8

9. Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 7323-7326)
   Restricts federal employees, including FBI agents, from engaging in partisan political activities while on duty.
   Source: Hatch Act

10. 18 U.S.C. § 242
    Prohibits government officials from depriving individuals of constitutional rights under color of law.
    Source: 18 U.S.C. § 242

11. Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. §§ 10301, 10307)
    Prohibits voter intimidation and government interference in the political process.
    Source: Voting Rights Act of 1965

12. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)
    A case affirming that government cannot suppress speech or actions based on potential threats without clear evidence.
    Source: Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)

 

News Sources and References:

1. Reuters, February 27, 2025
   Reports on the unexpected appointment of Dan Bongino as Deputy Director of the FBI and concerns from former FBI officials.
   Source: Reuters (Ensure the specific article is cited as the source for this date.)

2. Reuters, February 27, 2025 - David Laufman’s Concern
   Quotes David Laufman, former DOJ counterintelligence chief, on the potential for politicization.
   Source: Reuters (Specific article needed for citation.)

3. Reuters, February 27, 2025 - FBI Agents Association Concern
   Reports on the FBI Agents Association’s response to the Bongino appointment.
   Source: Reuters (Specific article needed for citation.)

4. NPR, Feb. 24, 2025 – Dan Bongino’s characterization of the FBI as "irredeemably corrupt"