Federal Judge Dismisses High-Profile Indictments Against James Comey and Letitia James

A federal judge has thrown out criminal indictments against James Comey and Letitia James. The ruling came on November 24, 2025. The decision was based on the unlawful appointment of the prosecutor.

Judge Cameron Currie found that prosecutor Lindsey Halligan was improperly appointed. This violation of federal law invalidated her authority. The cases against the former FBI director and New York attorney general were dismissed as a result.

Legal Flaw Leads to Case Collapse

Lindsey Halligan, a former Trump attorney, was appointed as interim U.S. attorney. Her appointment bypassed required Senate confirmation. This violated Section 546 of federal law and the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.

Judge Currie’s 26-page ruling declared all of Halligan’s actions invalid. She was the sole prosecutor to present evidence to the grand jury. Other career prosecutors had reportedly recommended against charging Comey and James.

The judge warned of dangerous precedents. She stated the government couldn’t send any private citizen to secure indictments. This would undermine the legal system’s integrity.

Implications for Justice and Future Prosecutions

The dismissals create immediate uncertainty for the Justice Department. Both indictments were dismissed “without prejudice.” This allows prosecutors to potentially refile charges with proper authority.

Legal experts see significant hurdles for the government. According to NBC News analysis, overturning this ruling appears difficult. The unique circumstances make this case particularly challenging.

The ruling affects other cases handled by improperly appointed attorneys. Similar disqualifications have occurred in California and Nevada. Numerous prosecutions now face legal challenges.

Reactions and Political Context

Letitia James welcomed the decision. She stated she remains “fearless in the face of these baseless charges.” Her attorney called the ruling a validation of their position.

James Comey’s legal team filed additional motions. They seek dismissal “with prejudice” to prevent revived charges. They argue the prosecution was “selective and vindictive.”

The White House issued a brief response. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said this wouldn’t be “the final word on this matter.” The Justice Department declined to comment.

Halligan’s appointment followed public pressure from former President Trump. He had urged prosecutions against political adversaries on social media. The timing raised questions about political influence.

The dismissal of these indictments highlights critical vulnerabilities in federal appointments. This ruling reinforces that proper legal procedures must be followed regardless of political pressure. The federal judge’s decision protects constitutional safeguards against improper prosecutions.

Info at your fingertips

What charges were James Comey and Letitia James facing?

James Comey faced charges of making false statements to Congress and obstruction. Letitia James was charged with bank fraud and making false statements. Both had pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Can prosecutors refile the dismissed charges?

Yes, the judge dismissed the indictments “without prejudice.” This means prosecutors could potentially bring new charges. They would need to do so through a lawfully appointed attorney.

What was wrong with Lindsey Halligan’s appointment?

Her appointment violated federal law governing U.S. attorney vacancies. It bypassed required Senate confirmation procedures. The Attorney General lacked authority to make this interim appointment.

Are other cases affected by this ruling?

Yes, several cases handled by improperly appointed attorneys face challenges. This includes the prosecution of Kabul airport bombing suspect Mohammad Sharifullah. Similar disqualifications have occurred in multiple states.

What happens to Lindsey Halligan now?

Her status as interim U.S. attorney remains uncertain. The Justice Department maintains her appointment was valid. However, her authority to handle cases has been effectively voided.

Could this ruling be appealed?

The Justice Department will likely appeal the decision. Legal experts suggest success is uncertain given the clear procedural violations. The appeal process could take several months.