2026-10-14T18:04:00-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
撰稿
更新时间：2026年10月14日 / 美国东部时间下午6:07 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
据熟悉此事的消息人士向哥伦比亚广播公司新闻透露，民主党众议员伊尔汉·奥马尔的多名亲属收到了大陪审团传票，作为对其家族历史展开的刑事调查的一部分，旨在查找其移民文件中可能存在欺诈和虚假陈述的证据。
传票于上周五发出，就在周一凌晨美国移民与海关执法局（ICE）调查人员搜查奥马尔在华盛顿特区的住所之前几天。
《纽约时报》最先报道了传票一事。
司法部在中期选举临近之际采取这些公开调查行动的决定引发了批评。这似乎与司法部内部指南相悖，该指南规定联邦检察官和特工“绝不得为影响任何选举，或为给任何候选人或政党带来优势或劣势的目的，选择任何行动的时机”。
按照惯例，司法部一直遵循2016年司法部监察长报告中提及的不成文“60天规则”。该规则指的是检察官通常避免在初选或大选前60天内公开与选举相关的调查行动，或对公职候选人提起公诉。
奥马尔是特朗普总统的频繁批评者，同时也是特朗普及其盟友的常见目标。她否认存在任何不当行为，并指责特朗普政府企图“打击政治敌人，将联邦执法工具政治化”。
特朗普周一表示，他与此次搜查“毫无关系”。但消息人士称，司法部长托德·布兰奇知晓此次搜查。消息人士还透露，负责美国最具政治敏感性刑事调查的公共诚信部门也被征询了意见。
但该部门去年在特朗普政府任内被大幅精简，仅剩下两名律师。目前尚不清楚该部门在搜查奥马尔住所前可能向司法部提供了何种指导。
目前也不清楚为何政府在选举临近之际采取执行搜查令的行动，因为相关文件中的部分内容可追溯至奥马尔的童年时期，由她已故的父亲填写。
据知情消息人士向哥伦比亚广播公司新闻透露，针对奥马尔住所的搜查令是在华盛顿的一名治安法官与司法部律师就如何处理“美国诉雷伯恩众议院办公楼案”引发的担忧进行长时间反复讨论后才获批的。这起关键的2007年华盛顿特区巡回法院案件裁定，在对现任国会议员的刑事调查中，行政部门在审查搜查扣押的信息时，必须允许该议员先依据宪法的言论或辩论条款对其进行立法特权审查。
其中一名消息人士补充称，最初的搜查令并未考虑雷伯恩案，因为调查人员搜查的是这位女议员的住所，而非其国会办公室，但治安法官下令他们纳入相关程序，允许奥马尔及其律师审查材料并主张立法特权。哥伦比亚广播公司新闻目前尚未确定奥马尔在此案中的代理律师是谁。
国土安全调查局（HSI），即该部门的刑事调查部门，正牵头开展此次调查，司法部予以协助。
这至少是涉及奥马尔及其家人的第二起主动刑事调查。
此前两名熟悉此事的消息人士告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，华盛顿特区联邦检察官办公室也正在就其丈夫的数家企业的估值展开刑事调查——哥伦比亚特区联邦检察官珍妮·皮罗本周在福克斯新闻的采访中证实了这一点。
奥马尔作为国会议员需提交的财务披露文件显示，这些企业的估值跃升至600万至3000万美元之间，此后其丈夫蒂姆·迈内特经营的企业便受到了审查。
奥马尔后来将估值计算归咎于会计失误，并提交了修正表格，将夫妇二人的联合资产估值列为18004美元至95000美元之间。
Rep. Ilhan Omar’s relatives issued subpoenas as part of immigration probe
2026-10-14T18:04:00-0400 / CBS News
By
Updated on: October 14, 2026 / 6:07 PM EDT / CBS News
Multiple relatives of Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar received grand jury subpoenas, as part of the ongoing criminal investigation into her family’s history for evidence of possible fraud and false statements in their immigration paperwork, sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.
The subpoenas were issued on Friday, just days before Omar’s home in Washington, D.C., was searched early Monday morning by investigators from ICE’s investigative unit.
The subpoenas were first reported by the New York Times.
The decision by the Justice Department to take those overt investigative steps so close to the midterm elections has sparked criticism. It appears to run contrary to the DOJ’s own internal guidelines, which stipulate that federal prosecutors and agents “may never select the timing of any action” for the “purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.”
Customarily, the Justice Department has operated under an unwritten, so-called “60-day rule” cited in a 2016 DOJ inspector general report. It refers to the general practice of prosecutors to avoid the public disclosure of investigative steps related to electoral matters or the return of indictments against a candidate for office within 60 days of a primary or general election.
Omar, a frequent critic of President Trump’s — and a frequent target of Mr. Trump and his allies — has denied any wrongdoing, and she has accused the Trump administration of attempting to “target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement.”
Mr. Trump said Monday that he had “nothing to do with” the raid. Sources said Attorney General Todd Blanche, however, was aware of the search. The Public Integrity Section, which handles the nation’s most politically sensitive criminal investigations, was consulted, the sources also said.
But that section was largely gutted by the Trump administration last year, with only two attorneys remaining in its ranks. It was not immediately clear what type of guidance the section may have provided to the department before the search was executed at Omar’s home.
It was also not immediately clear why the government moved to execute the warrant so close to the election, since some of the documents in question date back to Omar’s childhood and were completed by her late father.
The warrant to search Omar’s home was only approved by a magistrate judge in Washington after an extended back-and-forth discussion with Justice Department attorneys about how to address concerns stemming from the United States v. Rayburn House Office Building case, sources with knowledge told CBS News. That crucial 2007 D.C. Circuit Court case held that in a criminal investigation of a sitting member of Congress, the executive branch can’t review information that is seized in a search without allowing that member to first screen it for legislative privilege under the Constitution’s Speech and Debate clause.
Initially, the warrant did not take the Rayburn case into account because the investigators searched the congresswoman’s home and not her congressional office, but the magistrate judge ordered them to include protocols that would allow Omar and her counsel to review the materials and assert legislative privilege, one of the sources added. CBS News has not yet been able to determine who Omar’s lawyer is in this case.
Homeland Security Investigations, or HSI, the department’s criminal investigative arm, is leading the investigation, with the Department of Justice assisting.
This is at least the second active criminal investigation involving Omar and her family.
Two sources familiar with the matter previously told CBS News that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., is also conducting a criminal investigation into the valuation of several of her husband’s businesses — which D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro confirmed during a Fox News interview this week.
The businesses run by her husband Tim Mynett came under scrutiny after financial disclosures she was required to file as a member of Congress showed the value of the businesses had jumped to being worth between $6 million and $30 million.
Omar later blamed the valuation calculations on an accounting error and filed an amended form that listed the couple’s joint assets as being valued between $18,004 and $95,000.
发表回复