Federal Judge Throws Out Trump Indictments Against Comey and James
A federal judge has dealt a significant blow to President Donald Trump's lawless pursuit of his adversaries. In a decision that underscores the limits of executive overreach, US District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed two sham indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York State Attorney General Letitia James.
The indictments, obtained by the Department of Justice through a politicized appointment process, were part of an apparent vendetta against Trump's enemies. The president had directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to install an interim US attorney in Virginia with a mandate to go after Comey and James. Just days later, Halligan was appointed as the new interim US attorney, with a clear mission to pursue indictments against the two men.
However, Judge Currie saw through the administration's lawless actions, ruling that Halligan's appointment violated the clear language of the statute governing such appointments and the Constitution itself. By dismissing the indictments, she sent a strong message about the limits of executive power in a society governed by the rule of law.
The decision is significant not only for Comey and James but also for other judges who want to push back against the administration's vindictive prosecutions. It highlights the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that the government does not abuse its power to target political opponents.
In her ruling, Judge Currie noted that Halligan was a "White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience" who appeared alone before the grand jury after career prosecutors in her office concluded that neither Comey nor James had committed any crime. This lack of expertise and the apparent disregard for standard procedures undermined the legitimacy of the indictment process.
As Justice Department lawyer James M Burnham has noted, this high bar "plays a central role in the ever-expanding, vague nature of federal criminal law" by largely eliminating the possibility of purely legal judicial opinions construing criminal statutes. By enforcing these limits, judges can ensure that indictments are legally justified and that the rule of law is upheld.
The decision comes as part of a broader series of judicial rulings disqualifying Trump's interim US attorney picks in other states. These findings underscore the dangers of the administration's approach to prosecution and its willingness to circumvent the Constitution in pursuit of political vendettas.
Ultimately, the ruling reminds us that how things are done matters as much as what is done. Without fair procedures and adherence to the rule of law, no one can be safe from arbitrary exercise of government power.
A federal judge has dealt a significant blow to President Donald Trump's lawless pursuit of his adversaries. In a decision that underscores the limits of executive overreach, US District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed two sham indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York State Attorney General Letitia James.
The indictments, obtained by the Department of Justice through a politicized appointment process, were part of an apparent vendetta against Trump's enemies. The president had directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to install an interim US attorney in Virginia with a mandate to go after Comey and James. Just days later, Halligan was appointed as the new interim US attorney, with a clear mission to pursue indictments against the two men.
However, Judge Currie saw through the administration's lawless actions, ruling that Halligan's appointment violated the clear language of the statute governing such appointments and the Constitution itself. By dismissing the indictments, she sent a strong message about the limits of executive power in a society governed by the rule of law.
The decision is significant not only for Comey and James but also for other judges who want to push back against the administration's vindictive prosecutions. It highlights the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that the government does not abuse its power to target political opponents.
In her ruling, Judge Currie noted that Halligan was a "White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience" who appeared alone before the grand jury after career prosecutors in her office concluded that neither Comey nor James had committed any crime. This lack of expertise and the apparent disregard for standard procedures undermined the legitimacy of the indictment process.
As Justice Department lawyer James M Burnham has noted, this high bar "plays a central role in the ever-expanding, vague nature of federal criminal law" by largely eliminating the possibility of purely legal judicial opinions construing criminal statutes. By enforcing these limits, judges can ensure that indictments are legally justified and that the rule of law is upheld.
The decision comes as part of a broader series of judicial rulings disqualifying Trump's interim US attorney picks in other states. These findings underscore the dangers of the administration's approach to prosecution and its willingness to circumvent the Constitution in pursuit of political vendettas.
Ultimately, the ruling reminds us that how things are done matters as much as what is done. Without fair procedures and adherence to the rule of law, no one can be safe from arbitrary exercise of government power.
...i mean, trump's been using his powers to go after people he doesn't like for ages, and now she's putting a stop to it 
...it's all about accountability, you know? the fact that halligan was just some white house aide with no experience in prosecution makes the whole thing look super fishy 
...i'm glad justice is being served, even if it's just for Comey and james initially 
...this sets a precedent for other judges who might be facing similar situations, so let's keep our fingers crossed that more of these decisions come out 
This whole thing with Trump trying to take out Comey and James is wild 
. The judge's ruling is like a big fat middle finger to the admin's attempts to abuse power 
. I mean, come on, appointing some random White House aide as a prosecutor without any experience? That's just not how it works 
.
. The whole "rule of law" thing is so important, and this ruling reminds us that it's not just about enforcing laws, but also about upholding fairness and justice 
.
.
OMG you guys, this is like totally awesome news! 
A federal judge just threw out those trumped-up indictments against Comey and James - it's like a big ol' middle finger to Trump's crazy attempts to go after his enemies. I mean, come on, who tries to manipulate the justice system like that? 
The fact that Judge Currie saw through all that nonsense and ruled that Halligan's appointment was basically a total sham is just amazing.
I'm so proud of her for standing up to the administration's attempts to abuse their power 
. It's like she threw a big ol' bucket of confetti in Trump's face 
Like, what even is this? 
I'm so grateful for judges like her who keep our country's laws fair and just 
. This ruling is all about upholding the rule of law and keeping Trump's vindictive tendencies in check 
!
just saw this news and I'm like totally stoked for Comey & James! It's about time someone threw out those bogus indictments against them 
, which is exactly what they need in situations where the stakes are high and the pressure is on.
.
But seriously, this ruling sends a strong message about the limits of executive power and the importance of judicial oversight. It's like we're living in an episode of The West Wing where Bartlet would approve of such a move. 
justice department is getting roasted rn 
. It's all about the rule of law and stuff... without that, we'd be in big trouble 
and honestly, I think we're just seeing more of the same games played out in court, just with some different players 
it's all just a big show for the masses anyway 
judge currie is a total legend for throwing out those sham indictments against comey & james like what even did trump think he could get away with this