The lawsuit brought Monday by Chicago’s former FBI boss undercuts a key claim made by U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros’ office about the politically charged “Broadview Six” case — one that a judge had already sought to put under a microscope.
Boutros’ office told U.S. District Judge April Perry in March that there were “no communications of any nature from, to, or with anyone outside [the U.S. attorney’s office] (other than the local FBI investigators assigned to the case) regarding any investigatory or charging decisions.
“To be crystal clear, this specifically includes anyone in the White House” or at Justice Department headquarters in Washington, prosecutors wrote March 30.
But Monday, former FBI Special Agent in Charge Douglas DePodesta alleged in a lawsuit that Boutros met in DePodesta’s office Oct. 7, 2025, with then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel and Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald.
“During this meeting, Defendant Boutros discussed the Broadview Six investigation with his superiors in the Department of Justice and other law enforcement officers,” DePodesta’s attorneys wrote in the lawsuit.
Prosecutors first sought an indictment in the “Broadview Six” case two days later, records show. They eventually secured it Oct. 23, 2025, after the case was initially rejected by a grand jury.
The charges, made public days later, drew swift criticism and raised questions about whether Boutros’ office had targeted people for opposing the Trump administration. Meanwhile, defense attorneys have continued to press for information about any role the administration has played in the high-profile case.
DePodesta on Monday sued Boutros, Patel, Blanche, the FBI and the Justice Department, alleging Boutros falsely blamed DePodesta for the collapse of the “Broadview Six” case. DePodesta alleged that Boutros’ campaign led to DePodesta’s forced retirement.
The lawsuit opens a new legal front in the “Broadview Six” scandal, which Friday drew in the Justice Department’s third-highest ranking official, Stanley Woodward. Perry is also considering whether to name a special prosecutor to look into wrongdoing by the feds.
Neither Boutros nor a spokesperson immediately commented on the lawsuit Monday.
The “Broadview Six” case revolved around a protest outside an immigration holding facility in west suburban Broadview in September 2025. Prosecutors alleged that a crowd pushed and damaged a federal agent’s SUV.
But from that crowd, only six people were charged with a conspiracy to impede the agent. Most of them were involved in local Democratic politics, raising questions about selective prosecution.
Charged were then-congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, Oak Park village trustee Brian Straw, then-Cook County Board candidate Catherine “Cat” Sharp, 45th Ward Democratic committeeperson Michael Rabbitt, musician Joselyn Walsh and Abughazaleh campaign worker Andre Martin.
DePodesta’s lawsuit notes that “persons close to the Trump administration called for criminal prosecution of the protesters, particularly Kat Abughazaleh, who was running for the office of United States Representative at the time.”
Abughazaleh, a high-profile progressive known for her social media livestreams, wound up placing second in the crowded Democratic primary race for Illinois’ 9th District House seat. That race was won by Daniel Biss.
Boutros’ team later argued that claims of selective or vindictive prosecution were “the product of fevered paranoia and delusional speculation.”
The case collapsed May 21, after Perry discovered apparent misconduct by prosecutors before the grand jury.
Early last month, Perry asked Boutros’ office to turn over records related to key claims made by the feds. Woodward, the associate attorney general, asked her on Friday to clarify whether that “request” was really a “directive.” He also warned her that “the United States has not agreed to provide any information.”
One claim that’s drawn Perry’s interest is whether Boutros’ office communicated with anyone outside the office — including with White House or Justice Department officials — about the case. Despite the claim made by Boutros’ office in March, a lawyer from his office recently seemed to suggest such communications might exist, after all.
During an Oct. 1 hearing, Perry told Assistant U.S. Attorney Nathaniel Whalen she’d been told “there’s nothing. No way, no how.
“And now,” she said, “your argument has changed pretty significantly.”