Comey Posts Video Responding To Judges Decision

By
Billy Costigan
-

In a dramatic legal reversal, a federal judge has tossed out the Justice Department’s criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James—not because of the strength of their defenses, but due to a fundamental procedural flaw in the prosecution itself.

The indictments, which had made headlines for targeting two of Donald Trump’s most prominent and persistent political adversaries, were dismissed Monday by Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie. At issue: the legality of Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan’s appointment. According to Judge Currie’s ruling, Halligan—who brought the indictments against both Comey and James—had no lawful authority to do so.


The Justice Department had charged Comey with lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional investigation, while Letitia James was accused of mortgage fraud, allegedly providing false information on applications related to several properties she owns. Both cases were politically explosive, not only because of the charges themselves, but because of who was targeted.

Letitia James, in particular, has spent years locked in a legal battle with Trump’s business empire, accusing the president of widespread financial fraud. Comey, meanwhile, became a central figure in the 2016 and 2017 investigations into Trump and Russian election interference—first for his actions as FBI Director, and then for his public break with Trump following his firing.


But the court never reached the substance of those cases.

Instead, Judge Currie focused squarely on how Halligan came to her role. In a sharply worded ruling, he concluded that Attorney General Pam Bondi’s appointment of Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia violated federal law. Specifically, Currie pointed to the statutory limits on how interim appointments must be made after the expiration of a prior interim term.

“The Attorney General’s attempt to install Ms. Halligan… was invalid,” Currie wrote, making clear that Halligan’s lack of lawful authority invalidated any actions she took—including the indictments of Comey and James. The Justice Department’s argument that Bondi could retroactively authorize Halligan’s appointment was also rejected outright.


Crucially, the judge dismissed both cases without prejudice, meaning the DOJ can refile the charges—if they do so under a properly appointed official.

That caveat leaves the door open for these high-profile prosecutions to return, albeit under closer scrutiny. But the embarrassment for the DOJ is hard to miss. What was clearly intended to be a high-impact move against two of Trump’s most visible critics has instead become a procedural misfire, undercut by what the court calls an “unlawful exercise of executive power.”

The legal technicality may have spared Comey and James—for now. But the political firestorm surrounding their cases is far from over. Critics are already seizing on the dismissals as evidence of chaos inside the DOJ, while supporters of the prosecutions say it’s only a temporary setback. The court didn’t absolve either defendant; it simply hit pause.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR