Lawyer advises DOJ to dismiss fraud probe against Letitia James

In April 2025, the New York Attorney General's Office came under scrutiny after allegations surfaced regarding potential mortgage fraud involving Attorney General Letitia James. Allegations were made by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte, who claimed that James had falsified mortgage documents to mislead lenders about her principal residence intentions. These claims prompted Pulte to request an investigation by the Justice Department, raising concerns about politically motivated actions against James, especially in light of her ongoing legal battles with former President Donald Trump. Abbe Lowell, a prominent attorney, responded vigorously to the claims by sending a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, urging her to reject Pulte's request for a criminal probe. Lowell emphasized that the allegations were based on long-disproven accusations and suggested they were part of a politically motivated campaign against James by the Trump administration. He presented evidence to support the assertion that James had clarified her intentions regarding the Virginia property in prior correspondence, demonstrating that the claims against her lacked credible grounding. Lowell pointed out discrepancies in the accusations, particularly regarding a power-of-attorney form that misidentified the property as James's principal residence. He argued that emails and loan applications indicated her genuine intent to assist her niece in obtaining a home, rather than attempt to mislead financial institutions. Furthermore, Lowell criticized the political nature of the allegations and questioned the integrity of the Trump administration’s call for prosecution, highlighting a pattern of targeting perceived adversaries. Despite the contentious atmosphere surrounding this issue, the Attorney General's Office remained resolute in their defense of James, illustrating the significant tension between state officials and the federal administration. The unfolding situation is tied intricately to the backdrop of legal challenges faced by Trump, where claims of political retribution have emerged as a recurring theme. This situation serves not only as a commentary on the intersections of politics and law but also underscores the potential repercussions of politically fueled judicial actions.