Judge rules interim U.S. attorney Lindsey Halligan was unlawfully appointed
A federal judge, Cameron McGowan Currie, has ruled that Lindsey Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was unlawful. Currie found that Halligan’s appointment violated federal law and constitutional limits, which in turn invalidated her prosecutorial actions — including major indictments she brought.
The judge determined that the Attorney General’s authority to appoint a temporary U.S. Attorney under 28 U.S.C. § 546 had expired. Specifically, the 120-day limit for such interim appointments ran out, so after that, only the district court has the power to appoint someone in that role. Because Halligan was appointed after that window, her role was “invalid,” and she was “unlawfully serving” from September 22, 2025.
The judge also rejected a retroactive attempt by the Attorney General to appoint Halligan as a “special attorney” to validate her actions. Currie said that retroactive appointment doesn’t cure the original problem. All actions Halligan took in her capacity — including presenting indictments to grand juries — are now considered “unlawful exercises of executive power.”
As a consequence, Currie dismissed the criminal cases against James Comey and New York AG Letitia James, which Halligan had initiated. The dismissals were made “without prejudice,” meaning the Justice Department might refile the charges. However, for Comey, that could be hard: the statute of limitations on his charges may have expired.
Why It Matters
-
Statutory Interpretation of Appointments: The case centers on 28 U.S.C. § 546, which limits how long an interim U.S. Attorney can serve. Currie’s ruling reinforces that the 120-day limit is real and can’t be bypassed by reappointing someone in succession.
-
Checks on Executive Power: By declaring Halligan’s appointment unlawful, the judge checked what she saw as an attempt to circumvent Senate confirmation and court oversight.
-
Prosecutorial Legitimacy: Because Halligan lacked lawful authority, every action she took — including indicting high-profile figures — is now void under the judge’s decision.
-
Political and Legal Fallout: The ruling is a major rebuke of how Trump’s Justice Department may have used interim appointments for politically charged prosecutions.
-
Future Precedent: This could influence how future interim U.S. Attorney appointments are made, making it harder for administrations to stack “friendly” prosecutors without Senate confirmation.
Key Legal Outcomes
-
Halligan’s appointment as an interim U.S. Attorney was ruled invalid under federal law (28 U.S.C. § 546).
-
The judge found her serving past the legal 120-day limit was unlawful.
-
A retroactive “special attorney” designation was rejected and deemed ineffective.
-
The indictments against James Comey and Letitia James, which Halligan brought, were set aside as unlawful.
-
The cases were dismissed without prejudice, allowing for possible refiling—but Comey’s case may be barred by the statute of limitations.
- Broader Context: This case is part of a series of legal challenges over the use of interim U.S. Attorneys, especially in Trump-era appointments.
