Federal prosecutors in Chicago have spent roughly a year examining a Democratic fundraising company that was once partly owned by the daughter of the judge who presided over Donald Trump’s New York hush-money trial, according to court records and people familiar with the inquiry.
The investigation involved Authentic Campaigns Inc., a Democratic political fundraising firm where Loren Merchan, daughter of Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, previously served as vice president.
Justice Merchan oversaw the 2024 criminal trial in which Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts connected to efforts to conceal payments intended to keep an adult-film actress from publicly discussing an alleged past encounter with him.
Trump has long denied wrongdoing and has repeatedly accused the judge and his family of political bias. Those claims have not been substantiated.
Chicago Prosecutors Issued Broad Subpoena
Last August, U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros of the Northern District of Illinois issued a grand jury subpoena directing Authentic Campaigns to provide a wide range of internal communications.
Try Time Trackers
The original request sought material involving several prominent Democrats and political organisations, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, former President Joe Biden, New York Governor Kathy Hochul, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries and the Democratic National Committee.
Loren Merchan was also named in the request.
The subpoena represented an unusually broad demand for communications involving major political figures and organisations that had worked with the firm.
Scope Later Narrowed
Lawyers representing Authentic Campaigns challenged the breadth of the subpoena and sought to restrict the material prosecutors could obtain.
The company’s legal team included former Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.
According to people familiar with the matter, prosecutors later narrowed the inquiry considerably.
The revised focus reportedly centred on a $468 payment from Harris’s presidential campaign and email communications between Loren Merchan and her father.
It remains unclear whether prosecutors are still actively pursuing the investigation.
No additional subpoenas are known to have been issued directly to Loren Merchan or other individuals connected to the matter, which could indicate that prosecutors are not currently moving toward criminal charges.
Inquiry Followed Republican Referral
The federal investigation reportedly grew out of a criminal referral from Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee.
The committee had sought confidential material from Authentic Campaigns as part of its effort to examine whether Trump’s New York prosecution had been influenced by partisan politics.
The referral followed the company’s refusal to provide private communications requested by the committee, including emails involving Loren Merchan and her father.
Authentic Campaigns founder Mike Nellis has strongly criticised the investigation, describing it as politically motivated and based on unsupported conspiracy theories.
He also accused the administration of using federal law-enforcement powers to seek sensitive communications involving some of Trump’s most prominent political opponents.
The Justice Department declined to comment on the investigation, while Justice Merchan and Loren Merchan also did not provide public responses.
Subpoena Echoed Claims Made by House Republicans
The wording of the subpoena reportedly closely reflected arguments previously made by Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee.
The committee had questioned whether Trump’s prosecution in Manhattan was politically motivated and whether Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s handling of the case had been improper.
However, the subpoena reportedly did not identify a specific criminal offence that may have been committed in connection with Trump’s prosecution.
The original request also sought material linked to a broad group of Democratic politicians and institutions.
Those included Senator Adam Schiff, Representative Daniel Goldman, Representative Lauren Underwood, Democratic congressional fundraising organisations, the Democratic National Committee, Bragg and prosecutor Matthew Colangelo.
Authentic Campaigns Rejects Claims of Improper Influence
Lawyers for Authentic Campaigns have maintained that Loren Merchan had no influence over her father’s judicial decisions.
They also argued that she had little or no direct contact with many of the campaigns and political organisations that hired the firm.
The company resisted congressional demands for internal records, describing the inquiry as politically driven and potentially dangerous.
Its lawyers also said Nellis and Merchan had received serious threats and needed additional security because of the public accusations surrounding the case.
Trump Frequently Targeted Judge and Daughter
Justice Merchan became a major focus of Trump’s criticism before and during the hush-money trial.
Trump repeatedly argued that Loren Merchan’s work for Democratic clients created a conflict of interest for her father.
The judge declined to recuse himself.
An ethics complaint backed by Trump allies did not remove him from the case.
During the proceedings, Merchan also imposed a gag order restricting Trump from making statements that could threaten or intimidate jurors, witnesses, prosecutors or court staff.
Trump’s defence team attempted to have the order lifted but was unsuccessful.
Republicans Continued Investigating After Trial
After the trial, Republican lawmakers continued to investigate whether Democratic fundraising groups had benefited financially from Trump’s prosecution.
House Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan requested records from Authentic Campaigns and raised concerns about whether the firm had used Trump’s legal troubles in political fundraising.
Lawyers for the company rejected those accusations and argued there was no evidence that Loren Merchan or Nellis improperly exploited the case.
They also said Loren Merchan did not control or influence her father’s decisions from the bench.
Broader Questions Over Political Influence on Federal Prosecutors
The Chicago investigation has also drawn attention because of broader concerns about the role of U.S. attorney offices in politically sensitive cases.
Critics have argued that federal prosecutors are increasingly being pulled into disputes involving Trump’s political adversaries.
Supporters of the investigation, however, argue that prosecutors are entitled to examine credible referrals involving possible wrongdoing.
At this stage, the inquiry appears unresolved.
No charges have been announced, and it remains unclear whether prosecutors uncovered evidence that could support further legal action.
The investigation nevertheless adds another layer to the continuing political and legal disputes surrounding Trump’s 2024 hush-money conviction and the officials connected to the case.
