Judge dismisses Comey, James indictments after finding that prosecutor
was illegally appointed
[November 25, 2025]
By ERIC TUCKER
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Monday dismissed the criminal cases
against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General
Letitia James, concluding that the prosecutor who brought the charges at
President Donald Trump’s urging was illegally appointed by the Justice
Department.
The rulings from U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie halt at
least for now a pair of prosecutions that had targeted two of the
president's most high-profile political opponents and amount to a sharp
rebuke of the Trump administration's legal maneuvering to install an
inexperienced and loyalist prosecutor willing to file the cases.
The orders do not concern the substance of the allegations against Comey
or James but instead deal with the unconventional manner in which the
prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was named to her position as interim U.S.
attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Defense lawyers said the
Trump administration had no legal authority to make the appointment. In
a pair of similar rulings, Currie agreed and said the invalid
appointment required the dismissal of the cases.
“All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment,”
including securing and signing the indictments, “were unlawful exercises
of executive power and are hereby set aside,” she wrote.
A White House spokeswoman said the rulings will “not be the final word
on the matter,” and Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed at an unrelated
news conference that the Justice Department would pursue an “immediate
appeal.” Prosecutors may also try to refile the changes, a possibility
left open by the judge's orders.
Indictments had been subject to multiple challenges
The challenges to Halligan's appointment are just one facet of a
multiprong assault on the indictments by Comey and James, whose multiple
other efforts to dismiss the cases remain unresolved.
Both have separately asserted that the prosecutions were vindictive and
emblematic of a weaponized Justice Department. Comey's lawyers last week
seized on a judge's findings of a constellation of grand jury
irregularities and missteps by Halligan and James likewise has cited
“outrageous government conduct” preceding her indictment.
“I am grateful that the court ended the case against me, which was a
prosecution based on malevolence and incompetence and a reflection of
what the Justice Department has become under Donald Trump, which is
heartbreaking,” Comey, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of making a
false statement and obstructing Congress, said in a video statement.
In a separate statement, James, a Democrat who has pleaded not guilty to
mortgage fraud allegations, said, “I am heartened by today’s victory and
grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the
country.” She said she remained “fearless in the face of these baseless
charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”
Halligan's appointment
At issue in Currie's rulings is the mechanism the Trump administration
employed to appoint Halligan, a former White House aide with no prior
prosecutorial experience, to lead one of the Justice Department’s most
elite and important offices.
Halligan was named as a replacement for Erik Siebert, a veteran
prosecutor in the office and interim U.S. attorney who resigned in
September amid Trump administration pressure to file charges against
both Comey and James. He stepped aside after Trump told reporters he
wanted Siebert “out.”
The following night, Trump said he would be nominating Halligan to the
role of interim U.S. attorney and publicly implored Bondi to take action
against his political opponents, saying in a Truth Social post that, “We
can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility” and
“JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”
Comey was indicted three days after Halligan was sworn in by Bondi, and
James was charged two weeks after that.
[to top of second column]
|
FBI Director James Comey gestures as he speaks on cyber security at
the first Boston Conference of Cyber Security at Boston College,
March 8, 2017, in Boston. (AP Photo/Stephan Savoia, File)
Attorneys general do have the authority to name an interim U.S.
attorney who can serve for 120 days. But lawyers for Comey and James
argued that once that period expires, as it did in Siebert's case,
the law gives federal judges in the district the exclusive authority
to appoint a prosecutor to serve until the vacancy is filled. By
making successive interim U.S. appointments on its own, defense
lawyers said, the Justice Department did an end-run around
well-established law.
“The 120-day clock began running with Mr. Siebert’s appointment on
January 21, 2025. When that clock expired on May 21, 2025, so too
did the Attorney General’s appointment authority,” Currie wrote.
“Consequently, I conclude that the Attorney General’s attempt to
install Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern
District of Virginia was invalid and that Ms. Halligan has been
unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025.”
The Justice Department had defended Halligan's appointment but
revealed last month that it also given Halligan a separate position
of “Special Attorney,” presumably as a way to protect the
indictments from the possibility of collapse. But Currie said such a
retroactive designation could not save the cases.
“The implications of a contrary conclusion are extraordinary,” the
judge wrote. “It would mean the Government could send any private
citizen off the street — attorney or not — into the grand jury room
to secure an indictment so long as the Attorney General gives her
approval after the fact. That cannot be the law.”
Though the defendants had asked for the cases to be dismissed with
prejudice, meaning the Justice Department would be barred from
bringing them again, Currie instead dismissed them without prejudice
— leaving open the possibility that prosecutors could try to file
the charges again.
Comey was indicted just days before the five-year statute of
limitations in his case expired, which could complicate any effort
to refile the case. One of his lawyers, Patrick Fitzgerald, said in
a statement that Currie's decision “further indicates that because
the indictment is void, the statute of limitations has run and there
can be no further indictment.”
Judges have separately held that several other interim U.S.
attorneys — in New Jersey, Los Angeles and Nevada — have served in
their positions unlawfully but have also permitted cases brought by
their offices to proceed. Lawyers for Comey and James had argued
that Currie’s rulings needed to go even further because Halligan was
apparently the only prosecutor who presented evidence to the grand
juries.
Longtime foes of the president
Comey has for years been one of Trump’s chief antagonists. Appointed
FBI director in 2013 by President Barack Obama, Comey at the time of
Trump’s 2016 election was overseeing an investigation into whether
the Republican's presidential campaign had conspired with Russia to
sway the outcome of the race. Furious over that investigation, Trump
fired Comey in May 2017.
James has also been a frequent target of Trump’s ire, especially
since winning a staggering judgment against him and the Trump
Organization in a lawsuit alleging he defrauded banks by overstating
the value of his real estate holdings on financial statements. An
appeals court overturned the fine, which had ballooned to more than
$500 million with interest, but upheld a lower court’s finding that
Trump had committed fraud.
___
Associated Press writers Michael R. Sisak in New York and Lindsay
Whitehurst and Alanna Durkin Richer in Memphis, Tennessee
contributed to this report.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
