### Judge Dismisses Criminal Cases Against Trump Critics Comey and James, Citing Unlawful Prosecutor Appointment On November 24, 2025, a federal judge dismissed criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, marking a significant setback for the Trump administration. The judge ruled that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, who brought the charges, was unlawfully appointed, thus invalidating the cases against both Comey and James. This ruling is seen as a rebuke of President Trump's attempts to use the Justice Department to target his political adversaries, raising questions about the legality of the appointments made during his administration [https://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/judge-tosses-trump-team-case-against-james-comey-and-letitia-james-after-finding-that-prosecutor-was-illegally-appointed/a16746226.html, https://www.apnews.com/article/comey-james-justice-department-5ec1a59d152bc1fd000ade15e20745b5]. ### Overview of the Case Dismissal and Its Implications 1. **Background of the Cases**: - The charges against Comey included making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding, while James faced charges of bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution [https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2025/nov/25/comey-james-cases-tossed-citing-prosecutors]. - Both indictments were initiated by Halligan, who was appointed by Attorney General Pam Bondi after the previous interim U.S. attorney, Erik Siebert, reportedly found insufficient evidence to charge them [https://www.moneycontrol.com/world/judge-dismisses-comey-and-letitia-james-cases-over-unlawful-appointment-of-prosecutor-article-13694079.html]. 2. **Judge's Ruling**: - U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie ruled that Halligan's appointment was invalid because it violated federal law, which prohibits two successive interim U.S. attorneys [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/25/first-thing-us-judge-throws-out-criminal-cases-against-james-comey-and-letitia-james]. - The judge characterized the actions taken by Halligan as "unlawful exercises of executive power," leading to the dismissal of the indictments without prejudice, allowing for the possibility of refiling the charges [https://www.independent.ie/news/world/americas/us-politics/james-comey-trump-case-judge-b2871506.html]. 3. **Reactions and Next Steps**: - Both Comey and James welcomed the dismissal, with Comey emphasizing the importance of upholding the rule of law against political targeting [https://www.independent.ie/news/world/americas/us-politics/james-comey-letitia-james-doj-trump-b2872155.html]. - The White House indicated plans to appeal the ruling, suggesting that the legal battle may not be over [https://www.newsweek.com/letitia-james-comey-case-dismissed-update-donald-trump-11100936]. ### Summary of Findings and Future Considerations - **Key Conclusions**: - The dismissal of the cases against Comey and James underscores significant legal and ethical concerns regarding the Trump administration's use of the Justice Department for political purposes. - The ruling raises questions about the future of similar cases and the potential for re-filing charges, particularly given the expiration of the statute of limitations in Comey's case [https://www.asiaone.com/world/us-judge-tosses-cases-against-ex-fbi-chief-comey-new-york-ag-james]. - **Next Steps**: 1. The Justice Department is expected to appeal the ruling, which could prolong the legal proceedings. 2. Observers will be watching for any further actions from the Trump administration regarding other perceived political adversaries. 3. The implications of this ruling may influence future appointments and the conduct of the Justice Department under subsequent administrations. This case serves as a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal and political battles surrounding the Trump administration and its critics, highlighting the complexities of legal accountability in the political arena.