A federal judge dismissed the indictments against ex- FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James
This judgment canme after attorneys for former FBI Director James Comey asked a federal judge to dismiss the charges against him because, they say, a grand jury never approved the final indictment in the case.
The motion to dismiss came after prosecutors, including interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan, said in court this week that the indictment — which omitted a count that the grand jury rejected — was not seen in its final form by all grand jurors.
“The grand jury voted to reject the only indictment that the government presented to it,” Comey’s attorneys wrote in Friday’s filing. “Instead of presenting the grand jury with a revised indictment, Ms. Halligan signed a new two count indictment that the grand jury had never seen or voted on.”
The judge found that the appointment of interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan in Alexandria, Virginia, was invalid.
 |
| James Comey during interview |
Trump handpicked Halligan for the role amid increasing pressure to bring criminal cases against his political enemies, including Comey and James.
“The Attorney General’s attempt to install Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid,” Judge Cameron McGowan Currie wrote in her order.
According to Currie, “all actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment” including the indictments against Comey and James “were unlawful exercises of executive power and are hereby set aside.”
 |
| Attorney General Letitia James |
The judge tossed out the cases “without prejudice,” leaving open the possibility that the cases against Comey and James can be brought again alleging the same conduct.
Halligan, a former White House adviser, was picked for the role after the Trump administration pushed out the interim US attorney amid increasing pressure to bring cases against Comey and James.
In the cases against Comey — which Halligan brought before a grand jury just days after her appointment — and James, defense attorneys argued the 120-day period that an interim US attorney is allowed to serve prior to confirmation from the Senate or approval from the district’s judges had already expired when Halligan took the position.
This, they said, meant that Halligan’s appointment was unlawful.
Currie, in her order, wrote that unlawful appointment should “invalidate” Halligan’s actions — including presenting those two indictments to grand juries.
Prosecutors who work under Halligan argued Attorney General Pam Bondi has full authority to appoint whomever she wants to the position as long as they are qualified, and that the 120-day period serves as a sort of check-in system for those interim US Attorneys appointed.
“The implications of a contrary conclusion are extraordinary,” Currie wrote of the Halligan appointment. “It would mean the Government could send any private citizen off the street — attorney or not — into the grand jury room to secure an indictment so long as the Attorney General gives her approval after the fact. That cannot be the law. “