Case Against James Comey Dismissed, Judge cites Improper Appointment of Trump-Era Prosecutor
WASHINGTON – A federal judge has dismissed the case against former FBI Director James Comey, rebuking a Trump-era prosecutor for securing the indictment through what the court found was an improper appointment. The ruling, issued by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, also resulted in the dismissal of a parallel case against new York Attorney-General Letitia james.
The dismissal centers on the actions of Emily Halligan, a prosecutor appointed by then-Attorney general William Barr after the resignation of the Biden-appointed US attorney.Judge Kollar-Kotelly found that Barr had exhausted his authority to appoint an interim attorney and subsequently attempted to retroactively legitimize Halligan’s position through a questionable order designating her a “special attorney.” This maneuver, the judge ruled, did not grant Halligan the legal authority to convene the grand jury that indicted Comey and James.
Both Comey and James had pleaded not guilty. James faced charges of bank fraud and lying to a financial institution. the legal challenge to Halligan’s appointment was part of a broader defense strategy arguing the prosecutions were politically motivated and ”vindictive,” stemming from former President Trump’s personal animosity towards both individuals.
According to court documents, Halligan alone secured indictments against Comey and James after career prosecutors within the office declined to participate. Following the resignation of the initial Biden-appointed prosecutor, Barr appointed Siebert in an interim capacity, relying on arrangements enabled by district judges, but ultimately exhausting the opportunity for a confirmed Senate appointment.
In an attempt to bolster the cases, Barr issued an order on October 31, backdated to September 22 – three days before Comey’s indictment - installing Halligan as a “special attorney.” Judge Kollar-Kotelly rejected this retroactive submission of authority, stating, “The government has identified no authority allowing the Attorney-General to reach back in time and rewrite the terms of a past appointment.” She further emphasized,”Regardless of what the Attorney-General ‘intended’,or ‘could have’ done,the fact remains that Ms Halligan was not an ‘attorney authorised by law’ to conduct grand jury proceedings when she secured Mr Comey’s indictment.”
