Judge Demands Explanation From Terminated US Attorney Appointed By Trump

A federal judge has demanded answers from Lindsey Halligan, a former federal prosecutor who has been formally disqualified from office, after she continued to identify herself as a U.S. attorney in court filings despite a binding court order barring her from the role.

According to reporting by The New York Times, U.S. District Judge David J. Novak is reviewing whether Halligan misled the court by using the title after being ruled ineligible. Novak ordered Halligan to submit a written explanation within seven days. Novak, who was appointed to the Eastern District of Virginia by President Donald J. Trump during Trump’s first term, raised the issue after reviewing recent filings bearing Halligan’s disputed title.

Halligan previously served as a prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia but was later deemed legally ineligible to continue in that capacity.

In a three-page order, Novak stated that Halligan “identified herself therein as the United States Attorney for this District” despite “a binding Court Order entered by Senior United States District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie on November 24, 2025” disqualifying her from the position. Novak directed Halligan to “further explain why her identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement.”

Judge Currie, a Clinton appointee, ruled last November that Halligan’s appointment was improper under federal law. Halligan had been named to the role by President Trump following the resignation of then–U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert.

Siebert stepped aside after President Trump publicly criticized the office for failing to bring indictments against high-profile political figures tied to the Russia investigation. Siebert maintained at the time that prosecutors lacked sufficient evidence to pursue charges against figures such as former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan.

Despite her removal, Halligan identified herself in late December court filings as “Lindsey Halligan, United States Attorney Eastern District of Virgina [sic], Florida Bar No. 109481 2100,” according to the signature block. The misspelling of “Virginia” triggered immediate criticism from legal commentators and further intensified scrutiny over whether Halligan had authority to continue using the title at all.

The controversy carried serious legal consequences. Following Halligan’s disqualification, indictments she had issued against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) were dismissed outright. Prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have since paused new filings in several ongoing investigations, citing the leadership vacuum created by her removal.

The situation escalated further last month when another Clinton-appointed judge issued a sweeping order affecting the Comey prosecution. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly directed the FBI to destroy emails central to the obstruction and false statements case against Comey, a move legal experts warn could cripple future prosecutions and provoke a constitutional clash over judicial overreach.

Kollar-Kotelly issued the December 13 order instructing the FBI to permanently delete all data seized from Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman—Comey’s longtime associate and a former government contractor—by 4 p.m. Monday.

Prosecutors say the emails contain key communications between Richman and Comey allegedly demonstrating that Comey authorized leaks to the press and provided false testimony related to Operation Crossfire Hurricane.

The destruction order follows Comey’s September indictment on two counts—making false statements to Congress and obstruction of a congressional proceeding—stemming from his 2020 testimony about the Trump-Russia investigation. Prosecutors allege Comey falsely denied using intermediaries to leak classified information and relied on Richman as an external conduit for anti-Trump disclosures while Richman still held a government contract.

Notably, six years ago, Obama-appointed Judge James Boasberg approved the warrant allowing the FBI to seize Richman’s devices. Kollar-Kotelly’s directive—issued from a separate court and district—now mandates the destruction of that same evidence.

“This ruling threatens the separation of powers essential to the Republic, and either the D.C. Circuit or Supreme Court must intervene immediately,” said Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project and a former Senate Judiciary Committee counsel.