WASHINGTON — Former FBI Director James Comey is mounting a high-stakes legal challenge against Lindsey Halligan, the Trump-appointed interim U.S. Attorney overseeing his case — a move that could upend the government’s prosecution just months before his trial begins.
Comey, who faces charges of lying to Congress, plans to argue that Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) was legally invalid, potentially disqualifying her and undermining the indictment she signed off on.
The defense strategy, laid out in court this week, is part of a growing wave of challenges questioning the legitimacy of President Donald Trump’s interim federal prosecutors — many of whom were never confirmed by the Senate.
Halligan’s Appointment Under Fire
Comey’s attorneys, led by Patrick Fitzgerald, contend that Halligan’s authority expired after the 120-day limit set by the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, and that she does not meet either of the two legal exceptions that would allow her to continue serving.
Under federal law, an interim U.S. Attorney must either:
-
Be Senate-confirmed, or
-
Have worked within the Justice Department for at least 90 days prior to appointment.
Halligan, a former White House staff secretary and Trump’s personal attorney, has never served as a prosecutor, making her appointment a prime target for challenge.
The Justice Department is set to defend Halligan’s position in court in early November.
“This was a big week at the Department of Justice. Our EDVA U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan did an outstanding job,” Attorney General Pam Bondi tweeted after Comey’s indictment, praising Halligan’s leadership and commitment to “accountability and fairness.”
Legal Analysts See Vulnerability
Conservative legal commentator Ed Whelan wrote in the National Review that Halligan’s appointment appears legally dubious.
“It seems highly doubtful that Lindsey Halligan has been validly appointed as United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia,” Whelan argued. “If her appointment is invalid, so is her indictment of Comey.”
He noted that Halligan’s predecessor’s term had expired, meaning Trump lacked the authority to directly replace him without Senate approval or a court appointment.
Judge Michael Nachmanoff, who currently oversees the Comey case, said that a judge from another circuit will be brought in to hear the motion — mirroring procedures used in similar recent challenges.
Pattern of Challenges to Trump’s Prosecutors
Comey’s move isn’t isolated. Similar challenges have been raised this year in New Jersey, Nevada, California, and Los Angeles, all targeting Trump’s handpicked interim prosecutors.
In two cases — involving Alina Habba in New Jersey and Sigal Chattah in Nevada — federal judges ruled that their appointments violated the Vacancies Reform Act. Although indictments in those cases weren’t dismissed, both attorneys were disqualified from continuing.
The judges found that the Justice Department improperly extended interim appointments by reshuffling roles rather than following the required Senate or judicial approval process.
How Comey’s Case Stands Apart
Comey’s challenge could have greater implications because Halligan personally led the grand jury that indicted him, unlike the other cases where unqualified prosecutors had only indirect roles.
Legal experts say this distinction could make the indictment more vulnerable.
“If Halligan was named as an interim U.S. Attorney, Comey has an argument that she’s not legally serving,” said Nina Mendelson, a University of Michigan law professor.
Halligan’s rapid rise adds to the controversy. She replaced Mary “Maggie” Cleary, who had held the interim post for just two days, after Trump abruptly dismissed Erik Siebert, the previous acting U.S. Attorney who reportedly refused to pursue charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Since Halligan secured Comey’s indictment two weeks ago, two lower-level prosecutors have joined the case, possibly in anticipation of a court ruling that limits her involvement.
What Comes Next
For Comey to have the indictment thrown out, his defense must show that Halligan’s alleged unlawful appointment prejudiced the grand jury proceedings.
The Justice Department argues that the time limit on Halligan’s service is longer than 120 days — possibly 300 days — citing a different interpretation of the law.
A hearing on the matter is expected next month.
Meanwhile, Trump’s legal team has used similar challenges to delay or derail prosecutions before — including the classified records case in Florida, and the Georgia election interference case, where District Attorney Fani Willis was disqualified earlier this year.
0 Comments