In a significant development from Washington, a federal judge has dismissed the criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. This decision, announced on Monday, stems from the conclusion that the prosecutor responsible for these cases was appointed illegally by the Justice Department at the behest of President Donald Trump.

U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie’s rulings effectively pause the prosecutions against two prominent political figures who have been vocal opponents of Trump. This decision serves as a pointed critique of the Trump administration’s legal strategies, which involved appointing an inexperienced prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, perceived to be loyal to the administration, to the role of interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The dismissal does not address the specifics of the allegations against Comey and James. Instead, it focuses on the irregularities in Halligan’s appointment. Defense attorneys argued that the Trump administration lacked the legal authority to appoint Halligan, a stance that Judge Currie supported, leading to the dismissal of the cases.

Judge Currie stated that all actions stemming from Halligan’s flawed appointment, including the indictments she secured and signed, were “unlawful exercises of executive power” and must be nullified.

Reacting to the rulings, a White House spokesperson indicated that this may not be the case’s final chapter, while Attorney General Pam Bondi announced at a separate press event that the Justice Department would immediately appeal the decision. There remains a possibility that the charges could be refiled, a route Judge Currie’s orders have left open.

Indictments had been subject to multiple challenges

The challenges to Halligan’s appointment are just one facet of a multiprong assault on the indictments by Comey and James, whose multiple other efforts to dismiss the cases remain unresolved.

Both have separately asserted that the prosecutions were vindictive and emblematic of a weaponized Justice Department. Comey’s lawyers last week seized on a judge’s findings of a constellation of grand jury irregularities and missteps by Halligan and James likewise has cited “outrageous government conduct” preceding her indictment.

“I am grateful that the court ended the case against me, which was a prosecution based on malevolence and incompetence and a reflection of what the Justice Department has become under Donald Trump, which is heartbreaking,” Comey, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of making a false statement and obstructing Congress, said in a video statement.

In a separate statement, James, a Democrat who has pleaded not guilty to mortgage fraud allegations, said, “I am heartened by today’s victory and grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the country.” She said she remained “fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”

Halligan’s appointment

At issue in Currie’s rulings is the mechanism the Trump administration employed to appoint Halligan, a former White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience, to lead one of the Justice Department’s most elite and important offices.

Halligan was named as a replacement for Erik Siebert, a veteran prosecutor in the office and interim U.S. attorney who resigned in September amid Trump administration pressure to file charges against both Comey and James. He stepped aside after Trump told reporters he wanted Siebert “out.”

The following night, Trump said he would be nominating Halligan to the role of interim U.S. attorney and publicly implored Bondi to take action against his political opponents, saying in a Truth Social post that, “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility” and “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”

Comey was indicted three days after Halligan was sworn in by Bondi, and James was charged two weeks after that.

Attorneys general do have the authority to name an interim U.S. attorney who can serve for 120 days. But lawyers for Comey and James argued that once that period expires, as it did in Siebert’s case, the law gives federal judges in the district the exclusive authority to appoint a prosecutor to serve until the vacancy is filled. By making successive interim U.S. appointments on its own, defense lawyers said, the Justice Department did an end-run around well-established law.

“The 120-day clock began running with Mr. Siebert’s appointment on January 21, 2025. When that clock expired on May 21, 2025, so too did the Attorney General’s appointment authority,” Currie wrote. “Consequently, I conclude that the Attorney General’s attempt to install Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid and that Ms. Halligan has been unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025.”

The Justice Department had defended Halligan’s appointment but revealed last month that it also given Halligan a separate position of “Special Attorney,” presumably as a way to protect the indictments from the possibility of collapse. But Currie said such a retroactive designation could not save the cases.

“The implications of a contrary conclusion are extraordinary,” the judge wrote. “It would mean the Government could send any private citizen off the street — attorney or not — into the grand jury room to secure an indictment so long as the Attorney General gives her approval after the fact. That cannot be the law.”

Though the defendants had asked for the cases to be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the Justice Department would be barred from bringing them again, Currie instead dismissed them without prejudice — leaving open the possibility that prosecutors could try to file the charges again.

Comey was indicted just days before the five-year statute of limitations in his case expired, which could complicate any effort to refile the case. One of his lawyers, Patrick Fitzgerald, said in a statement that Currie’s decision “further indicates that because the indictment is void, the statute of limitations has run and there can be no further indictment.”

Judges have separately held that several other interim U.S. attorneys — in New Jersey, Los Angeles and Nevada — have served in their positions unlawfully but have also permitted cases brought by their offices to proceed. Lawyers for Comey and James had argued that Currie’s rulings needed to go even further because Halligan was apparently the only prosecutor who presented evidence to the grand juries.

Longtime foes of the president

Comey has for years been one of Trump’s chief antagonists. Appointed FBI director in 2013 by President Barack Obama, Comey at the time of Trump’s 2016 election was overseeing an investigation into whether the Republican’s presidential campaign had conspired with Russia to sway the outcome of the race. Furious over that investigation, Trump fired Comey in May 2017.

James has also been a frequent target of Trump’s ire, especially since winning a staggering judgment against him and the Trump Organization in a lawsuit alleging he defrauded banks by overstating the value of his real estate holdings on financial statements. An appeals court overturned the fine, which had ballooned to more than $500 million with interest, but upheld a lower court’s finding that Trump had committed fraud.

___

Associated Press writers Michael R. Sisak in New York and Lindsay Whitehurst and Alanna Durkin Richer in Memphis, Tennessee contributed to this report.