reutersTwo of President Trump’s most prominent critics scored a legal victory on Monday when a federal judge dismissed the government’s charges against them.
In the weeks since their indictment, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have fiercely argued that they are innocent, and claimed that the President and the Justice Department are singling them out merely for retribution.
U.S. District Judge Cameron Curry dismissed the indictment against prosecutor Lindsay Halligan because of her “invalid” appointment as U.S. attorney. But he also left the door open for the government to try again.
Comey acknowledged that possibility after the verdict, saying he believed Trump would “probably come after me again.”
And White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson seemed to confirm: “This will not be the last word on this matter.”
But the government faces enormous obstacles to successfully prosecuting this blowback, and the unprecedented nature of the cases has left experts hesitant to predict what might happen next.
“This seems like uncharted territory to me,” said Kay Levin, a professor at Emory University School of Law.
Can the Justice Department appeal?
The Justice Department can challenge Judge Curry’s decision in a higher appeals court. In this example, that would be the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi indicated she would pursue this path, promising to use all available legal action, including an “immediate appeal.”
In other cases, the Trump administration has aggressively appealed adverse rulings, taking cases from lower courts and sometimes fast-tracking its requests all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Abbey Lovell, the attorney representing James, vowed to “continue to challenge any politically motivated allegations through every legal means available.”
In the event of an appeal, the Justice Department would likely have its own lawyers arguing the case, leaving Halligan’s role in the appeal unclear.
Could new allegations be made?
The government accused Comey of making false statements to Congress and obstruction of justice. Federal prosecutors charged James with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution.
Both of them declared themselves innocent. In addition to arguing that Halligan was hired unlawfully, both also claimed to be the victim of retaliatory prosecution.
After the original indictments are dismissed (although, of course, appeals can change this) the government can attempt to convene a new grand jury and secure new indictments.
“As far as I’ve seen, a different attorney could bring James’ case to a new grand jury and get a new indictment,” Ms. Levin said.
But John Day, president of the American College of Trial Lawyers, said it could be a complicated path — certainly in Comey’s case.
“I can tell you that there will be heated debate over whether Mr. Comey’s case could be re-conviction if a legally appointed prosecutor is appointed and is able to secure a conviction.”
He described the tangle of lawyers, judges and motions involved as a “procedural mess” with no simple answers.
It may be difficult for the government to try to bring exactly the same charges against Comey.
One problem is the statute of limitations — the deadline for prosecutors to charge Comey on these specific charges — which expired at the end of September. However, the dismissal of the indictment would give the Justice Department a six-month grace period to reopen the case.
Yet in that case, his legal team said it plans to argue that the government doesn’t have time.
“The decision also indicates that because the indictment is void, the statute of limitations has expired and there can be no further prosecutions,” attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said Monday.
What happens to Lindsey Halligan?
In rulings on the indictments against James and Comey, Judge Curry stated clearly: Halligan was wrongfully appointed.
Judge Curry wrote in James’ decision that “the Attorney General’s effort to install Ms. Halligan as interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid.”
Therefore, Halligan “had no lawful authority to file an indictment”, she wrote.
U.S. attorneys are nominated by the President and require confirmation by the U.S. Senate. Federal laws regulate how people can be appointed on a temporary basis, but Judge Curry found that Halligan’s appointment violated these laws.
This again leaves Halligan’s role in future cases against James and Comey unclear.
The decision could also impact other cases brought by Halligan in the Eastern District of Virginia, where he serves.
But Bondy said Monday that he made Halligan “a special American lawyer” and described his work as “outstanding.”
Press Secretary Carolyn Leavitt told reporters on Monday that the White House maintained its position that Halligan was legally appointed.
<a href
Slottica Casino to propozycja dla graczy szukających nowoczesnej platformy do gry online i wygodnego dostępu do szerokiej oferty rozrywki. Serwis wyróżnia się intuicyjnym interfejsem, sprawną obsługą płatności oraz atrakcyjnym wyborem gier dopasowanych do różnych preferencji. Na szczególną uwagę zasługują wysokie standardy bezpieczeństwa, w tym szyfrowanie danych i rozwiązania chroniące prywatność użytkowników na każdym etapie korzystania z platformy. Dzięki temu gracze mogą skupić się na zabawie, mając pewność, że ich dane osobowe i finansowe są odpowiednio zabezpieczone. To jeden z ciekawszych wyborów dla osób zastanawiających się, gdzie grać online w bezpieczny i komfortowy sposób.