A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that a third acting U.S. attorney has been unlawfully occupying the position for several months. This decision came just a week after the Department of Justice defended its staffing decisions in a federal appellate court. The ruling specifically addresses the appointment of acting U.S. attorneys by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Bilal “Bill” Essayli, who was appointed as an interim U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, California, joins Alina Habba in New Jersey and Sigal Chattah in Nevada in similar circumstances. These positions are meant to be temporary, lasting up to 120 days, due to constitutional requirements that permanent appointments receive U.S. Senate approval.

However, Bondi, along with President Donald Trump, extended these temporary roles by vacating the first assistant U.S. attorney positions, which are second in command, through reassignments or firings. This maneuver allowed the interim attorneys to continue as acting attorneys without Senate confirmation.

In the case of Essayli, defendants Ismael Garcia, Jr., Jaime Hector Ramirez, and Ronny Rojas claimed that Bondi exploited the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) to bypass congressional oversight by dismissing the first assistant and appointing anyone of their choosing as acting U.S. attorney. These appointees were also given special attorney status with supervisory authority over their offices.

Essayli’s resignation letter, submitted just before his interim term ended, clearly outlined this strategy. The letter, similar to those of Habba and Chattah, stated, “I hereby resign my position as Interim United States Attorney for the Central District of California effective at 5:00 p.m. PDT today, July 29, 2025 … I look forward to continuing to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.”

Senior U.S. District Judge J. Michael Seabright, a George W. Bush appointee in Hawaii sitting by designation in the California case, ruled Tuesday that Essayli has been unlawfully serving as acting U.S. attorney since the end of July.

“Simply stated: Essayli unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California. He has been unlawfully serving in that capacity since his resignation from the interim role on July 29, 2025,” Seabright concluded. “Essayli may not perform the functions and duties of the United States Attorney as Acting United States Attorney. He is disqualified from serving in that role.”

“Moreover, Essayli remains the FAUSA and may perform the functions and duties of that office,” the judge added, ordering up the third such disqualification of an acting U.S. attorney following criminal defendants’ challenge of their authority, but without tossing out indictments as a remedy.

In a more detailed explanation, the judge said Essayli’s acting U.S. attorney service “is unlawful and has been unlawful since it began on July 29, 2025” because his resignation “did not trigger” § 3345(a) of the FVRA.

“First, § 3345(a) is triggered only by the death, resignation, or incapacity of a PAS officer [one appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate], so Essayli’s service as Acting United States Attorney cannot be premised on his resignation from the interim role,” Seabright said. “And second, subsection (a)(1) assigns the acting role only to a first assistant in place when a PAS officer dies, resigns, or is incapacitated. Essayli was not the FAUSA when [Martin] Estrada resigned [as U.S. Attorney], so Essayli’s service as Acting United States Attorney cannot be premised on that resignation.”

Third, the judge said, Essayli’s dual status as a special attorney couldn’t lawfully make him acting U.S. attorney either.

“[F]inally, Essayli’s service cannot be premised on his appointment as a Special Attorney; that theory is foreclosed by the FVRA’s exclusivity provisions,” the judge concluded.

Essayli reacted on X by claiming “nothing is changing,” even as he shared an image of the ruling that said he was “never lawfully serving as Acting U.S. Attorney” yet “remains” first assistant.

For those who didn’t read the entire order, nothing is changing. I continue serving as the top federal prosecutor in the Central District of California. It ‘s an honor and privilege to serve President Trump and Attorney General Bondi, and I look forward to advancing their agenda… pic.twitter.com/0T7AILbLi1

— Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) October 29, 2025

While the judge found Essayli was “properly” appointed a special attorney and can supervise prosecutions as first assistant, he “cannot do so as Acting U.S. Attorney.” Nonetheless, Essayli still identifies himself on X as acting U.S. attorney.

On the heels of a 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals oral argument on Habba’s appointment, the 9th Circuit may very well end up having to consolidate DOJ appeals over Chattah and Essayli’s authority. In the end, this issue may be one for the U.S. Supreme Court to solve.

Read the order here.