Comey and James Request Case Dismissal: NPR
Lawyers representing former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have filed a request for case dismissal in Alexandria, Virginia. They argue that the prosecutorial authority that secured the indictments against them was improperly installed.
Legal Proceedings Overview
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie announced she would issue a ruling by Thanksgiving concerning Lindsey Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. The outcome may significantly influence the ongoing politically sensitive cases against Comey and James.
Defense lawyers claim Halligan’s appointment was executed unconstitutionally, aimed at ensuring indictments against politically opposed figures of former President Donald Trump. They argue her swift installation came just before Comey’s indictment, essentially circumventing legal protocols for appointing U.S. attorneys.
Controversial Appointment of Lindsey Halligan
- Trump’s administration pushed for Halligan’s appointment following the resignation of Erik Siebert under pressure to prosecute Comey and James.
- Halligan, previously a White House aide with limited prosecutorial experience, was appointed by Attorney General Pam Bondi in September 2025.
- Before Halligan, Siebert had served as interim U.S. attorney after being nominated by Trump and confirmed by judges in the Eastern District.
Ephraim McDowell, one of Comey’s attorneys, stated, “A prosecutor lacking authority spells significant legal error.” His remarks highlight concerns that Halligan’s installation may not comply with federal regulations governing U.S. attorneys. Typically, these positions are filled following presidential nominations and Senate confirmations.
Arguments for Dismissal
The defense contends that under the law, judges alone hold the authority to appoint a U.S. attorney after an interim period. They assert that the government’s method of appointing Halligan was unlawful and inappropriate. “If the government succeeds, it could bypass Senate confirmations for U.S. attorneys,” McDowell argued.
Additionally, the defense seeks a permanent dismissal of the indictment against both Comey and James. They believe this is necessary to prevent the government from benefiting from its own procedural infractions.
Justice Department’s Defense
The Justice Department maintains that there are no legal grounds to void the indictment. Henry Whitaker, a departmental lawyer, claimed the grand jury properly evaluated the case based on available facts and legal standards. He characterized the alleged errors surrounding Halligan’s appointment as mere paperwork issues, not sufficient for case dismissal.
Whitaker stated that the indictment was validated by Bondi’s review and confirmation of grand jury proceedings. However, Judge Currie raised concerns about missing sections of those proceedings, leading to questions about the transparency of the indictment process.
Background of the Cases
James Comey faces charges related to making a false statement and obstructing Congress, while Letitia James deals with allegations of mortgage fraud. Both defendants maintain their innocence.
This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of a strained history between Trump, Comey, and James. Comey was dismissed from his FBI role amid investigations into Trump’s campaign ties to Russia, while James has consistently confronted Trump, culminating in a significant fraud judgment against the former president.
The ongoing legal maneuvers surrounding Comey and James reflect a broader narrative of political rivalry and judicial scrutiny. As the judicial decision approaches, the stakes remain high for all entities involved.
