A federal judge on Monday threw out the criminal indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that the prosecutor who brought the charges had been improperly appointed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie dismissed the false-statements case against Comey and the bank-fraud case against James without prejudice, meaning federal prosecutors could seek new indictments in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nIn a sharply worded opinion, Currie wrote: \u201cI conclude that the Attorney General\u2019s 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.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Judge Rules Prosecutor Was Not Legally Installed<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The ruling centers on Lindsey Halligan, whom Attorney General Pam Bondi tapped as interim U.S. attorney in one of the Justice Department\u2019s most influential districts. The appointment raised immediate questions because Halligan had no prosecutorial experience and assumed the position just days after the removal of the prior interim U.S. attorney, Erik Siebert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Halligan personally presented both cases to the grand jury and was the sole lawyer to sign the resulting indictments\u2014an unusual move given the high-profile nature of the cases and the absence of career prosecutors from the Eastern District of Virginia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense attorneys for Comey and James argued that Halligan had no lawful authority to act. Abbe Lowell, representing Letitia James, said Halligan was effectively a \u201cprivate person\u201d when she entered the grand jury rooms and \u201ccompletely unauthorized to be in them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
DOJ Attempted to Ratify the Indictments<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The Justice Department has defended Halligan\u2019s installation, and Bondi attempted to ratify the indictments retroactively, an action Currie noted would not have been necessary had the appointment been legally valid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
During a recent hearing, DOJ attorney Henry Whitaker characterized the controversy as \u201cat best a paperwork error.\u201d Currie was not persuaded, signaling skepticism about Halligan\u2019s standing even before issuing Monday\u2019s order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Currie, a Clinton-era appointee now based in South Carolina, was assigned to the case after Virginia\u2019s federal judges recused themselves due to the unusual procedural issues raised by Halligan\u2019s appointment. The challenges brought by Comey and James were consolidated because they involved identical questions of authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
High-Profile Cases Scrapped, For Now<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The dismissals mark a significant development in two of the most closely watched prosecutions targeting officials long viewed unfavorably by conservatives for their roles in investigations and legal actions against former President Donald Trump. Comey has been a lightning rod for criticism over the FBI\u2019s handling of the 2016 Trump-Russia investigation, while Letitia James led New York\u2019s aggressive civil case against Trump and his business empire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The DOJ could appeal Currie\u2019s ruling or choose to bring the charges again\u2014this time through a properly appointed U.S. attorney.<\/p>\n\n\n\n