The Department of Justice is preparing to appeal a federal judge’s decision to dismiss indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. The dismissals were handed down after a Clinton-appointed judge ruled that the special prosecutor overseeing both cases, Lindsey Halligan, was improperly appointed.
The core of the judge’s ruling focused on a federal statute that limits the Attorney General’s ability to make successive interim appointments for U.S. Attorney positions. In this case, Halligan was installed after a 120-day period had already expired for her predecessor, meaning, according to the court, only a district court judge had the authority to name a replacement. Because Halligan lacked proper legal standing at the time of the indictment, the judge determined the cases must be dismissed.
However, the DOJ is not backing down. Officials have signaled they will challenge the ruling on multiple grounds, arguing that even if Halligan’s appointment process was flawed, it should not invalidate the indictments entirely. DOJ leaders have also emphasized that the cases were later reviewed and ratified by senior officials, including the Attorney General, adding legitimacy to the process.
While the case against Letitia James may be revived with a new, properly appointed prosecutor, the ruling poses a more serious challenge for the Comey case. The judge noted the statute of limitations could now prevent the government from bringing new charges. DOJ officials dispute this interpretation and are expected to argue that the clock had not yet run out.
The appeal will test the limits of interim appointment authority and whether administrative missteps can upend high-profile prosecutions. It also raises larger questions about how strictly courts will enforce procedural rules amid politically charged investigations. For the DOJ, the fight is now about preserving the integrity of the indictments and ensuring accountability continues, even under technical scrutiny.
