The Justice Department has taken the extraordinary step of preparing to seek an indictment against John Bolton, the hawkish former national security adviser, according to a report by CBS News. The move, if formalized, would mark a rare criminal escalation against a former top White House official and reopen long-simmering disputes over prepublication review, classified information and accountability.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the matter, citing the department’s policy of not discussing ongoing investigative steps. Bolton, who served as national security adviser from 2018 to 2019 and later published a contentious memoir, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Sources close to Bolton have previously insisted he complied with all prepublication reviews and would vigorously contest any criminal charge.

Legal experts say prosecutors are likely focused on allegations that Bolton disclosed classified material either in his book or in subsequent public statements, and may pursue charges such as willful retention of classified documents or violations tied to unauthorized disclosures. “Prosecutors would need to prove not just that classified information was disclosed, but that it was willfully mishandled,” said a former federal prosecutor familiar with national security litigation. That burden of proof — particularly the element of willfulness — has been decisive in past cases.

The potential indictment resurrects disputes that accompanied Bolton’s 2020 memoir, The Room Where It Happened, which the Trump administration sought to block before publication on grounds that it contained classified information. Bolton ultimately published the book after a process of prepublication review; the case never culminated in criminal charges at the time. The new development suggests prosecutors have gathered evidence they believe justifies moving forward now — a decision that will prompt close scrutiny of the prepublication review process and the Justice Department’s threshold for charging former officials.

The international implications are immediate. Diplomats and allied capitals routinely rely on the United States to safeguard sensitive information; an indictment of a former national security official could be interpreted abroad as an effort to restore strict controls on disclosures, or conversely as a politicized use of criminal law. “How the United States prosecutes its own former officials sends a signal about the rule of law,” said a senior foreign policy analyst. “Allies will watch whether this is a principled enforcement of security rules or something more partisan.”

Historical precedent offers mixed guidance. The 2015 prosecution of retired General David Petraeus resulted in a plea to a misdemeanor for mishandling classified materials, while other high-profile cases have ended without indictment when prosecutors judged the legal hurdles insurmountable. Bolton’s case is likely to be fought vigorously in the courts, with defence strategies expected to emphasize prepublication clearance, public-interest considerations and First Amendment protections.

If prosecutors present charges to a grand jury, the case will become a national political flashpoint in a country already divided over how to balance transparency, accountability and security. Beyond Washington, the outcome could influence how governments and publics around the world view the U.S. commitment to both open governance and the strict protection of state secrets.