A controversial top Justice Department official inserted himself into Chicago's “Broadview Six” case Friday, insisting "the United States has not agreed to provide any information" sought by the judge who might name a special prosecutor to look into alleged wrongdoing by the feds.Associate Attor ney General Stanley Woodward, the Justice Department’s third-highest ranking official, asked U.S. District Judge April Perry for clarity as a deadline loomed Friday for prosecutors to hand over records Perry sought three weeks ago.She characterized the inquiry as a “request.” Related What to know about the ‘Broadview Six’ scandal rocking Chicago’s federal courthouse Woodward asked Perry whether that “request” was really a “directive.” He also asked the judge for a “concrete notice of the factual basis for any investigation” she might conduct. He warned, “the United States believes further proceedings would not be appropriate.”And, he said any independent attorney appointed by Perry must be supervised by the attorney general.“A prosecution for contempt must be supervised by the executive branch,” Woodward wrote.It wasn’t immediately clear how Perry would respond, or what might happen next in the fraught litigation. Still, Woodward’s entry suggests things are unlikely to calm down. April Perry speaks to the Senate Judiciary Committee July 31, 2024.Sen. Dick Durbin/YouTube Woodward has increasingly found himself at the center of the Justice Department’s national controversies. Shortly before entering Chicago’s “Broadview Six” case, he faced off with a federal judge in an hourslong hearing in Washington, according to news reports.That hearing began with U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes reading from the professional conduct rules for lawyers in Washington, eyeing Woodward directly as she stressed the lines that concerned making factual assertions in court, according to CNN.Woodward’s name also appeared at the top of the Justice Department’s recent lawsuit over possible results in the Alaska Senate race. Back in May, he signed the settlement agreement between the president and the IRS that established the controversial “anti-weaponization fund” for people who claimed to be harmed by “lawfare” and the weaponization of the justice system.No prosecutor from U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros’ office signed the 12-page brief Woodward filed Friday in the “Broadview Six” case. Two local prosecutors withdrew from the case ahead of Woodward’s entry. They were Assistant U.S. Attorneys Diane MacArthur and Nathaniel Whalen. Related ‘Broadview Six’ judge wants to put prosecutors under oath, keeps contempt charges on the table 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. Kat Abughazaleh (from left), Michael Rabbitt, Andre Martin and Brian Straw stand together after their Operation Midway Blitz case was dismissed during a hearing Thursday at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse. They were four members of the so-called “Broadview Six.”Ashlee Rezin/Sun-Times The case against them collapsed on May 21, after Perry discovered that Assistant U.S. Attorney Sheri Mecklenburg allegedly spoke to grand jurors outside the grand jury room and put her personal credibility on the line to support charges. The judge also indicated Mecklenburg had excused grand jurors who disagreed with the feds’ case, a claim Mecklenburg denies.The former defendants asked Perry to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Boutros and other Justice Department officials for criminal contempt. Earlier this month, Perry concluded that further “under oath" fact-finding was needed.And she left open the possibility of naming a special prosecutor.Roughly a week later, the judge asked Boutros’ office for a specific set of records that seemed to target two claims made by the feds last spring. Related ‘Broadview Six’ judge testing claims made by Boutros, others in tainted case One involved whether Boutros’ office communicated with anyone outside the office — including with White House or Justice Department officials — about the case. Defense attorneys have specifically raised questions about Aakash Singh, another top Justice Department official.Perry also seemed interested in Boutros’ claim that he only learned of certain alleged wrongdoing by his team in late April. He’s since acknowledged receiving a transcript in October 2025 that documented some of Mecklenburg’s alleged misconduct.Woodward didn’t mention Boutros in his filing, but he did mention the feds’ past claim that “there are no communications of any nature from, to, or with anyone outside of the U.S. Attorney’s Office.”“If the truthfulness of that statement in the [U.S. Attorney’s Office’s] brief is what drives this court’s decision to investigate, the United States requests the court so clarify,” Woodward wrote. ...read more read less