In a significant legal blow to the Trump administration, a federal judge has declared that three US attorneys appointed to lead the New Jersey attorney general's office were installed illegally, echoing earlier rulings against executive overreach.
Judge Brann's Scathing Ruling
Federal Judge Matthew Brann, in a blistering 130-page ruling issued on Monday, stated that Attorney General Pam Bondi repeated the error of bypassing congressional approval by handpicking prosecutors Jordan Fox, Ari Fontecchio, and Philip Lamparello. These appointments followed the resignation of Alina Habba, who was disqualified in December after courts ruled she served illegally without Senate confirmation.
Judge Brann, chief judge of the district court for the middle district of Pennsylvania, warned that such executive branch overreach could jeopardize all cases before him. He emphasized that allowing the president to appoint US attorneys unilaterally without Senate consent would enable an unchecked expansion of power, contradicting constitutional norms.
Legal Maneuvering and Backlash
Brann accused Bondi of maneuvering by splitting the New Jersey attorney general's role into three parts and appointing administration-friendly lawyers to share responsibilities. Bondi argued this dilution exempted the appointments from congressional approval, but Brann found no legal authority for such actions, stating they were an attempt to evade Senate confirmation requirements.
The justice department has not immediately commented on the ruling. Meanwhile, Alina Habba, now a senior adviser to Bondi, attacked Brann on social media, calling his decision "another ridiculous ruling" and accusing judges of overreaching into executive functions.
Implications for Criminal Cases
The case was brought by criminal defendants in New Jersey seeking dismissal of their cases due to the illegal appointments. While Brann did not order the removal of the three attorneys pending a government appeal, he warned that continuing with unconfirmed leadership could lead to dismissals of pending cases. He questioned why the fate of thousands of prosecutions rested on an unprecedented leadership structure, highlighting potential risks to justice.
Broader Context of Illegal Appointments
This ruling marks the second time in a week that federal courts have deemed Trump administration appointments illegal for lacking Senate approval. In a separate case, an appeals court judge in Arizona ruled that Kari Lake unlawfully led the US Agency for Global Media in 2025, voiding actions she took during that period.
Judge Brann's decision underscores ongoing tensions between the executive and judicial branches, with implications for legal proceedings and constitutional checks and balances in the United States.
