WASHINGTON D.C. – A United States federal judge on Monday, November 24, 2025, dismissed criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that the prosecutor who brought the charges was unlawfully appointed. The decision by U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie is a significant setback for the Trump administration's efforts to prosecute two of its most prominent critics.

The ruling, issued in the Eastern District of Virginia, found that interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, who was handpicked by President Donald Trump, had been illegally serving since September 22, 2025, and therefore lacked the legal authority to secure the indictments. In her written opinion, Judge Currie stated, "All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment...constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside."

This development has no direct link to Kenyan affairs but is of international significance, highlighting the legal and political battles surrounding the U.S. Department of Justice's independence. For Kenyans and the wider East African region, it serves as a case study in judicial oversight and the functioning of democratic checks and balances on executive authority.

Details of the Charges

James Comey was indicted on September 25, 2025, on two counts: making a false statement to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The charges related to his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 30, 2020, regarding the FBI's investigation into links between Russia and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. Letitia James, who has conducted several high-profile investigations into Donald Trump's businesses, was indicted in early October 2025 on charges of bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution. Both Comey and James had pleaded not guilty, arguing the prosecutions were politically motivated and retaliatory.

The Prosecutor's Appointment

The core of the legal challenge rested on the appointment of Lindsey Halligan. A former Trump aide with no prior prosecutorial experience, Halligan was appointed as interim U.S. Attorney after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, was forced out. Siebert had reportedly expressed reluctance to pursue charges against Comey and James, citing insufficient evidence.

Judge Currie's ruling affirmed that under federal law, the attorney general's authority to appoint an interim U.S. attorney is limited to 120 days. After that period, the authority to fill a vacancy transfers to the district court judges. The judge found that the Trump administration circumvented this law to install Halligan, making her appointment and all subsequent actions invalid. This is the fourth instance of a Trump-appointed acting U.S. attorney being deemed to be serving unlawfully.

Implications of the Dismissal

The charges against both Comey and James were dismissed "without prejudice," which theoretically allows the Department of Justice to refile them with a lawfully appointed prosecutor. However, for Comey, this is unlikely as the five-year statute of limitations for the alleged crimes expired in September 2025. The path to re-indicting James remains open, and the Justice Department has indicated it may appeal the ruling.

In a statement following the ruling, Comey said, "I'm grateful the court ended the case against me, which was a prosecution based on malevolence and incompetence and a reflection of what the Department of Justice has become under Donald Trump." He added, "This case mattered...because a message has to be sent that the president of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies."

Letitia James also welcomed the decision, stating, "I am heartened by today's victory...I remain fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day."

The ruling is widely seen as a rebuke of what critics have termed the "weaponization" of the U.S. Justice Department for political ends. While the legal saga may continue, particularly for James, this dismissal marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing scrutiny of executive power and prosecutorial independence in the United States.