Judge Scrutinizes US Attorney Appointment Amidst Comey, James Cases and Grand Jury Irregularities
Federal Judge Cameron McGowan Currie is scrutinizing the appointment of US Attorney Lindsey Halligan, who prosecuted James Comey and Letitia James, amidst challenges to her legitimacy and revelations about grand jury proceedings.
Overview
- Federal Judge Cameron McGowan Currie is scrutinizing the appointment of US Attorney Lindsey Halligan, who prosecuted James Comey and Letitia James, amidst challenges to her legitimacy.
- Comey and James are seeking dismissal of their indictments, arguing Halligan's appointment was invalid, while the DOJ urges against dismissal over a "paperwork error."
- During a hearing, Judge Currie questioned Attorney General Pam Bondi and Whitaker regarding incomplete grand jury transcripts and Whitaker's involvement in Comey's case review.
- Currie ordered full grand jury transcripts, revealing Halligan was the only government lawyer present during the grand jury proceedings for both Comey and James.
- The judge is expected to rule by Thanksgiving on the validity of Halligan's appointment, which followed President Trump's demand for action against Comey and James.
Report issue
Read both sides in 5 minutes each day
Analysis
Center-leaning sources frame this story by emphasizing the legal challenges to Lindsey Halligan's appointment and the indictments she brought. They highlight the judge's skepticism and concerns about procedural irregularities, such as missing grand jury transcripts. The narrative underscores potential political motivations behind the cases, drawing attention to Halligan's lack of experience and the context of Trump's public pressure.
"The indictments against Comey and James came after Trump publicly urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey, James and another of the president’s adversaries, Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif."
NBC News"The challenges to Lindsey Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia are part of multi-prong efforts by former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James to get their cases dismissed before trial."
ABC NewsArticles (12)
FAQ
The main legal challenges claim that Lindsey Halligan's appointment was an evasion of the Appointments Clause and question the legitimacy of her continued service, particularly given her role in prosecuting James Comey and Letitia James.
Comey and James argue that the indictments against them should be dismissed because Lindsey Halligan's appointment as US Attorney was invalid, affecting the legitimacy of the prosecution.
Judge Currie noted that transcripts of the grand jury proceedings were incomplete and ordered full transcripts to be produced, highlighting that Lindsey Halligan was the only government lawyer present during these sessions for both James Comey and Letitia James cases.
The Department of Justice argues against dismissing the indictments, characterizing the appointment problems as a mere 'paperwork error' and maintaining that the prosecutions should continue.
Judge Currie is expected to issue a ruling by Thanksgiving on the validity of Lindsey Halligan's appointment as US Attorney.
History
- 24d
3 articles
- 24d
3 articles