Bondi Vows Appeal After Judge Tosses Comey, James Cases
Attorney General Pam Bondi is reportedly incensed after a Clinton-appointed federal judge tossed out the Justice Department’s high-profile cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James — not because of evidence, but due to what the court claimed were procedural flaws. Still, Bondi made it clear the fight is far from over.
According to the Daily Mail, U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie on Monday threw out the indictments filed by Lindsey Halligan, President Trump’s interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Currie accused Halligan of “prosecutorial misconduct,” a characterization that immediately drew sharp pushback from Bondi and other Trump-aligned officials who argue the judiciary is once again protecting entrenched political allies.
“Shame on them for not wanting her in office,” Bondi fired back after the decision. “I’ll tell you, Lindsay Halligan, I talked to all of our US attorneys, the majority of them around the country, and Lindsay Halligan is an excellent US attorney.”
Currie dismissed the cases without prejudice, leaving the door open for Bondi and the Justice Department to revive the prosecutions.
Bondi emphasized that the administration is not backing down: “We have made Lindsay Halligan a special US attorney so she is in court, she can fight in court just like she was, and we believe we will be successful on appeal.”
She continued, according to the Daily Mail: “We’ll be taking all available legal action, including an immediate appeal, to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct. I’m not worried about someone who has been charged with a very serious crime. His alleged actions were a betrayal of public trust.”
Currie’s opinion rested on the claim that a 120-day deadline for interim U.S. attorney appointments had lapsed under the previous officeholder — meaning, in the judge’s view, Bondi lacked authority to designate Halligan and should have deferred to the district’s federal judges to name a replacement.
“I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms Halligan’s defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr Comey’s indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside,” Currie wrote.
Comey and James had both moved to dismiss the indictments and disqualify Halligan, asserting that her appointment was invalid and urging the court to dismiss the charges with prejudice. Such a ruling would have permanently shielded them from being re-prosecuted. Currie declined, instead opting for the less drastic dismissal without prejudice.
Comey currently faces allegations of making a false statement and obstructing a congressional proceeding tied to his 2020 Senate testimony, where he denied authorizing FBI personnel to leak sensitive information to the media.
James is charged with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution stemming from allegedly falsified mortgage documents.
Halligan’s appointment in September followed the removal of her predecessor, Erik Siebert, who had also been serving on an interim basis. Siebert’s exit came amid President Trump’s push for stronger accountability regarding officials involved in targeting his political supporters and undermining his first term.
Attorneys for Comey argued that once Siebert left office, federal judges — not the Justice Department — should have selected the new interim U.S. attorney. Although Trump formally nominated Halligan after urging Bondi to proceed with charges, the legal challenge over her temporary appointment became the focal point of the defense.
Comey was indicted days after the nomination for allegedly lying to Congress and obstructing its work. James was later charged in connection with the mortgage fraud probe.
While federal judges in other districts have previously disqualified interim U.S. attorneys in unrelated cases, those courts allowed prosecutions brought under their tenure to move forward.
Comey’s and James’ attorneys insisted that this situation differed because Halligan personally signed the indictments and drove the prosecutorial decisions at every stage.
Both James and Comey — openly in James’ case, and covertly in Comey’s — played direct roles in efforts to undermine President Trump and disrupt the work of his first term, making these cases politically explosive and closely watched.