It feels like we’ve seen this movie before, right? A high-stakes legal battle, the Eastern District of Virginia as the backdrop, and James Comey right in the middle of it all. But honestly, the latest chapter involving James Comey challenges a Trump appointment of US Attorney Halligan is weirder and more complex than your average political thriller. This isn't just about a former FBI director fighting a court case; it’s a fundamental clash over who actually has the power to appoint the people who put us in jail.
Basically, the whole thing kicked off when President Trump moved to install Lindsey Halligan as the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA). If that name sounds familiar, it's because she was one of his personal defense attorneys during the Mar-a-Lago documents saga. She had zero prosecutorial experience. None. One day she’s defending the President, and the next, she’s the top federal prosecutor in one of the most powerful districts in the country, signing indictments against Trump’s biggest rivals—specifically, James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
The Legal Loophole That Backfired
The core of the issue is a dusty piece of federal law called 28 U.S.C. § 546.
Under normal circumstances, U.S. Attorneys are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. But since that takes forever, the Attorney General can appoint an "interim" person for 120 days. After those 120 days are up, the law says the power to appoint an interim successor shifts to the local district court judges.
📖 Related: The Galveston Hurricane 1900 Orphanage Story Is More Tragic Than You Realized
When James Comey challenges a Trump appointment of US Attorney Halligan, his legal team pointed out something glaring. The previous interim guy, Erik Siebert, had already used up that 120-day window. Comey’s lawyers argued that Attorney General Pam Bondi couldn't just "reset the clock" by appointing Halligan. They argued the authority had already passed to the judges.
It turns out, Judge Cameron McGowan Currie agreed. In a scathing ruling in late 2024, she basically said Halligan was holding the office unlawfully. She didn’t just wag her finger, either; she tossed the indictments against Comey and Letitia James right out the window.
Why This Still Matters in 2026
You’d think a judge saying "you aren't actually the U.S. Attorney" would be the end of it. It wasn't. As of early 2026, Halligan is still using the title in court filings. It’s kinda surreal. She recently filed a response to Judge David Novak, who asked her why she’s still calling herself the U.S. Attorney despite being disqualified. Her response? She called the judge’s questions a “gross abuse of power.”
👉 See also: Why the Air France Crash Toronto Miracle Still Changes How We Fly
This "shell game" with titles is why the James Comey challenges a Trump appointment of US Attorney Halligan story is still leading the news. The Department of Justice is trying to argue that Judge Currie’s ruling only applied to those specific cases, not Halligan’s entire status. But other judges in the district aren't buying it. Judge Novak pointed out that no stay was issued on Currie's order, meaning it's binding precedent.
The Fallout in the "Rocket Docket"
The Eastern District of Virginia is known as the "Rocket Docket" because it moves fast. But right now, it’s in total chaos.
- Career Prosecutors are Leaving: At least four senior prosecutors were fired or resigned because they didn't want to bring the cases Halligan was pushing.
- The McBride Dismissal: Just this week, Robert McBride—the second-in-command who was brought in to stabilize things—was shown the door. Rumor has it he refused to lead the re-indictment efforts against Comey.
- Blue Slip Battles: Trump tried to get Halligan confirmed by the Senate, but Virginia Senators Tim Kaine and Mark Warner used the "blue slip" tradition to block her.
It’s a mess. If Halligan’s appointments are truly invalid, every single indictment she’s signed since September 2025 could be legally "poisoned." We’re talking about hundreds of cases that might be vulnerable to the same challenge Comey used.
✨ Don't miss: Robert Hanssen: What Most People Get Wrong About the FBI's Most Damaging Spy
What Happens Next?
The DOJ has appealed the dismissals to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. If the Fourth Circuit sides with Comey, it’s a massive blow to the administration’s ability to bypass the Senate. If they side with Halligan, it basically gives the Executive Branch a permanent workaround for Senate confirmations.
For the average person, this might feel like "lawyer talk," but the stakes are actually about whether a President can hand-pick a personal lawyer to run a prosecution office without any oversight.
Actionable Insights for Following the Case:
- Watch the Signature Blocks: Check if the DOJ starts referring to Halligan as "Special Attorney" instead of "U.S. Attorney." This is a sign they are trying to "cure" the appointment error retroactively.
- Follow the Fourth Circuit: The upcoming oral arguments in USA v. Comey will likely decide the fate of interim appointments nationwide.
- Monitor the "Rocket Docket" Caseload: If more defense attorneys start filing "Halligan Motions" to dismiss their own clients' cases based on her lack of authority, the office could grind to a halt.
Keep an eye on the filings in the Richmond division of the EDVA. That’s where Judge Novak is currently holding Halligan’s feet to the fire regarding her professional conduct. If she is found to have made "false or misleading statements" about her title, she could face disciplinary action that goes way beyond just losing a case.