In a deeply ironic and constitutionally alarming development, the Office of Special Counsel—the independent federal agency tasked with preventing the politicization of the U.S. government—has launched an investigation into former Special Counsel Jack Smith. Smith, who led the historic criminal probes into President Trump, is now being investigated for the very kind of political activity the agency was created to police.
This is not a routine ethics probe. It is a profound test of the integrity of our institutional guardrails. The investigation, targeting a high-profile adversary of the President and initiated by an agency now led by a Trump appointee, raises a grave question: What happens when the very watchdog designed to protect our republic from political influence is itself captured and weaponized?
The Hatch Act: A Shield for Impartial Governance
To understand the stakes, we must first understand the purpose of the Hatch Act. Passed in 1939, this law is a cornerstone of our professional civil service. It was designed to be a shield, protecting federal employees from political coercion and, just as importantly, protecting the American people by ensuring that the machinery of government is not used as a tool to influence elections.
The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) was established as the independent, non-partisan enforcer of this act. Its mission is to be the impartial referee that keeps the federal government’s vast power out of the political arena.
A Shield Turned into a Sword?
The current investigation into Jack Smith threatens to turn this shield into a sword. The official pretext is a claim that Smith may have violated the Hatch Act by filing a court brief within 60 days of the 2024 election. However, legal experts like Richard Painter, the former chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, have cast serious doubt on this, stating, “I have never seen a prosecutor found to violate the Hatch Act for pleading with a court.”
The constitutional crisis emerges when you examine the context. This probe was launched only after President Trump fired the previous, Senate-confirmed head of the OSC and installed a loyalist in an “acting” capacity. This single act irrevocably taints the credibility of the investigation. It creates the powerful and unavoidable appearance of political retribution—of using the guise of an ethics investigation to harass the prosecutor who dared to investigate the President.
The Danger of a Captured Watchdog
This incident is a case study in what watchdogs and former federal officials are calling the “capture” of our independent agencies. A government watchdog is only effective if it is credible and independent. When its leadership is replaced with political loyalists and its focus shifts to investigating the President’s enemies, it ceases to be a watchdog.
It becomes, instead, an instrument of the very power it is meant to police. As one former ethics official told CNN, “The office is a shell of its former self.” This is a grave constitutional danger. The framers designed a system of checks and balances between the three main branches. The modern administrative state created a new set of internal checks, like the OSC, to act as the government’s immune system against corruption and politicization. When that immune system is compromised and turned against the body it is meant to protect, the entire system is at risk.
The investigation into Jack Smith is about far more than the conduct of one former prosecutor. It is about the integrity of our entire system of government ethics. A watchdog that only barks at the President’s political opponents is no longer a watchdog; it is an attack dog. And a republic that uses its ethics laws as a political weapon is a republic in serious peril.