Federal Judge Overturns Trump-Backed Prosecutions
A federal judge has delivered a significant blow to former President Donald Trump's legal campaign against his political opponents, throwing out indictments brought by his hand-picked attorney against James Comey and Letitia James. Judge Cameron Currie ruled that Lindsey Halligan, a former beauty queen turned prosecutor, had been unlawfully appointed to bring the cases forward.
Unlawful Appointment and Prosecutorial Misconduct
In a strongly worded ruling, Judge Currie accused Halligan of prosecutorial misconduct and declared her appointment invalid. The judge determined that a 120-day deadline for interim appointments had expired during the previous prosecutor's tenure, meaning Attorney General Pam Bondi lacked the authority to appoint Halligan. This power should have rested with the district's federal judges instead.
"I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms Halligan's defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr Comey's indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside," wrote Judge Currie, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton.
The ruling represents a major setback for Trump's efforts to prosecute his political adversaries. Halligan had been specifically selected by the former president after he expressed frustration that Bondi wasn't moving quickly enough against Comey and James.
Bondi's Furious Response and Appeal Plans
Attorney General Pam Bondi launched a vigorous defence of her former beauty pageant rival following the judge's decision. "Shame on them for not wanting her in office," Bondi declared during a press conference. She praised Halligan as "an excellent US attorney" and vowed to continue the legal fight.
"We have made Lindsay Halligan a special US attorney so she is in court, she can fight in court just like she was, and we believe we will be successful on appeal," Bondi stated. She promised that this wouldn't mark the end of legal action against either Comey or James.
Bondi confirmed that her office would pursue "all available legal action, including an immediate appeal" to hold both figures accountable for what she described as "unlawful conduct."
The Dismissed Cases and Their Implications
James Comey faced charges of making a false statement and obstruction of a congressional proceeding relating to his 2020 Senate testimony. The former FBI director had denied authorizing FBI officials to leak information to the press during that testimony.
Letitia James, the New York Attorney General, was indicted on charges including bank fraud and making false statements to financial institutions. Prosecutors alleged she had falsified information on mortgage applications.
Both defendants had requested that their cases be dismissed with prejudice, which would prevent the Justice Department from bringing the same charges against them again. Judge Currie granted this request, delivering a permanent blow to these particular legal actions.
In a statement following the ruling, James expressed relief at the outcome. "I am heartened by today's victory and grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the country," she said. "I remain fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day."
Background of the Political Legal Battle
The cases represent the latest chapter in long-running conflicts between Trump and both officials. Comey has been a frequent target of Trump's anger since his dismissal as FBI director in 2017, while James has pursued multiple legal actions against Trump and his business operations.
Halligan's appointment came after Erik Siebert, a different interim attorney, was forced out amid pressure from Trump to file charges against his political enemies. Comey's legal team had argued that after Siebert's departure, the judges should have had exclusive authority to fill the vacancy.
Instead, Trump publicly pressed Bondi to take action, writing "JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!" on his Truth Social platform. Comey was indicted days later, followed shortly by James facing mortgage fraud charges.
The ruling highlights ongoing tensions between the executive branch and judiciary over appointment powers, particularly in politically sensitive cases. Similar disputes have seen judges disqualify interim US attorneys in New Jersey, Los Angeles and Nevada, though those judges permitted cases brought under their watch to continue.
