Judge Rules Comey, Letitia James Indictments Invalid Over Improper Appointment

A federal judge has dismissed indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James after finding a procedural defect in the appointment of the prosecutor who filed both cases. Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie determined that Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. attorney responsible for bringing the charges, was not validly appointed under governing rules, and that flaw compelled the court to vacate the indictments.

The ruling centers on the authority of an interim U.S. attorney to initiate prosecutions. Judge Currie concluded the appointment process that placed Halligan in the acting post did not comply with applicable statutes or internal Justice Department procedures, undermining the legal foundation for the indictments she filed. By focusing on the appointment’s legality rather than the merits of the underlying allegations, the decision removed the immediate prosecutorial basis for both cases.

Legal experts say the judgment is likely to prompt review within the Department of Justice. The DOJ can decide whether to appeal the ruling or to reassess the appointment and, if possible, refile charges under a properly constituted office. Either path could prolong litigation and generate additional procedural hearings as parties dispute the scope and timing of any corrective measures.

For Comey and Letitia James, the immediate effect is the dismissal of the charges tied to Halligan’s authority to prosecute. The ruling does not address the substantive allegations in the underlying complaints and leaves open whether the government will attempt to resurrect the cases through corrective administrative steps or appeals.

The decision underscores the judiciary’s role in policing not just the substance of criminal allegations but also the procedural integrity of the mechanisms that bring them. Court watchers note this outcome may have broader implications for other matters initiated by interim or acting officials, potentially prompting agencies to review appointment practices to avoid similar challenges.

CNBC reported on the court’s ruling. As the parties weigh next steps, stakeholders from both legal and political circles will be monitoring any Department of Justice responses, appeals, or administrative remedies that could determine whether the indictments can be reinstated or are permanently sidelined.