Rep. Ilhan Omar’s lawyers accuse DOJ of violating judge’s orders to follow protocols to protect her rights as a member of Congress

Lawyers for Rep. Ilhan Omar have accused the Justice Department of violating a magistrate judge’s order by failing to follow certain protocols intended to safeguard her constitutional interests as a member of Congress during the search of his house in Washington, D.C.

In the Oct. 16 letter, Omar’s lawyers, Amy Jeffress and Joshua Matz, called on the government to immediately return the congresswoman’s property, and they also demanded that all video and audio recordings of the search be preserved.

“This vindictive, punitive, and politically motivated criminal investigation against one of the President’s leading critics in Congress violates Rep. Omar’s constitutional rights and threatens the separation of powers,” they wrote in the letter, which was reviewed by CBS News.

In a statement, a Justice Department spokesperson disputed the allegations in the letter, saying it was “riddled with false allegations and inaccuracies.”

“Our attorneys and law enforcement partners have complied with all court orders and legal obligations, as they always do,” the spokesperson said. “Releasing a letter to the press immediately after it has been sent is not in good faith. It is a publicity game.”

Homeland Security Investigations agents executed a search warrant at Omar’s home Monday as part of a broader criminal investigation into his family’s background, looking for evidence of possible fraud and misrepresentations in their immigration documents.

His personal cell phone was among the documents seized during the search, CBS News previously reportedand grand jury subpoenas were also issued just days before the search to some members of Omar’s family.

The search warrant was first presented to a magistrate judge in the United States District Court about a week before his execution.

Prosecutors and the judge engaged in a lengthy exchange, after the judge expressed concerns that the search warrant did not incorporate any protocols intended to protect Omar’s legislative privileges under the speech and debate clause of the Constitution, CBS News previously reported.

These protections arise from United States v. Rayburn House Office Building DC Circuit Court in 2007, which ruled that in a criminal investigation of a sitting member of Congress, the executive branch cannot review information seized during a search without allowing that member to first review it for legislative privilege.

Initially, prosecutors tried to argue that the case should not apply because the search was conducted at Omar’s home, not his congressional office, CBS News previously reported.

In the letter to the Justice Department, Omar’s lawyers allege that several key requirements imposed by the judge were not met.

HSI agents, for example, were supposed to notify Omar and the House Counsel’s Office of the execution of the search warrant — a step that Omar’s lawyers say never happened.

The agents also allegedly prevented her from contacting her attorney for more than an hour after the search began, the letter alleges, even though she and her attorney were supposed to be presented with a copy of the search warrant at the outset.

The timing of the search warrant and issuance of grand jury subpoenas in this case raised eyebrows among many veteran former prosecutors.

Such overt investigative steps involving a member of Congress so close to an election appear to run counter to internal Justice Department guidelines, which state that prosecutors and agents should avoid taking overt investigative steps that could affect the outcome of an election or give an advantage or disadvantage to a candidate.

Omar’s lawyers also raised the same concerns in their letter to the department, stating: “Historically, the department has refrained from this type of investigative activity so close to an election, in order to avoid even the appearance of politically motivated police actions.” But the political motivations behind this pre-election investigation and search are clear as day.

Omar has been for a long time a frequent political target by President Trump and his allies. Mr. Trump has also made disparaging comments about her Somali heritage and religion, and he has repeatedly accused her of immigration fraud.

“There is no legitimate basis to suggest that she violated any law regarding her citizenship status,” her lawyers wrote in the letter to the Justice Department, adding that the search of her home “is the result of a years-old conspiracy theory regarding conduct dating back decades.”

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security made unusually public remarks about the non-public criminal investigation in a podcast Friday, calling it a “strong case.”

In an interview with Andrew Kolvet, who hosts “The Charlie Kirk Show,” Mullin said several arrest warrants were served Monday, adding that a judge had authorized the enforcement action and investigators expected to present their case to a grand jury.

It is unusual for federal officials to speak openly about ongoing criminal investigations beyond confirming that a court-authorized search was conducted, in part because of due process and grand jury secrecy rules.