In a significant legal development, a federal judge has temporarily blocked prosecutors from accessing crucial evidence in the criminal case against former FBI director James Comey. This decision represents a major setback for the government's already challenging prosecution.
Judge Rules Search Likely Unconstitutional
The ruling, issued on Saturday by federal district judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, found that the government's actions likely violated the fourth amendment protections of Daniel Richman against unreasonable searches. Richman, a Columbia University law professor and former attorney for Comey, is a central figure in the case.
Prosecutors allege that Comey lied to Congress about authorising leaks to the media, relying heavily on private communications between Comey and his close friend and former colleague, Richman, to build their case. Comey has consistently and vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
A History of Warrants and a Warrantless Search
The controversy stems from the government's investigation into Comey between 2017 and 2020. During that period, authorities obtained multiple warrants to search an image of Professor Richman's computer. That initial investigation concluded in 2021 without charges being filed against either man.
However, according to a searing opinion written in November by magistrate judge William Fitzpatrick, the government retained all information taken from Richman's computer, not just material relevant to the original warrants. Crucially, when a new investigation into Comey was launched this year, prosecutors did not obtain a fresh warrant. Instead, they conducted a warrantless search of the old materials, potentially exposing communications protected by attorney-client privilege.
Mounting Setbacks for the Prosecution
Judge Kollar-Kotelly's four-page order, which will remain in effect until 12 December, halts prosecutors' access to Richman's files. This blow comes amid a series of setbacks for the US attorney's office for the eastern district of Virginia, which is handling the Comey prosecution.
In a related and extremely rare move just days before this ruling, a federal grand jury in Virginia declined to approve a new indictment sought by prosecutors against another political rival of Donald Trump, New York attorney general Letitia James. The Comey case itself has already seen a federal judge dismiss charges, ruling that the prosecutor was improperly appointed. The justice department under the second Trump administration is expected to attempt to re-indict Comey.
This latest judicial intervention underscores the complex legal battles surrounding figures from the previous administration and raises serious questions about prosecutorial conduct and the protection of constitutional rights.
