🔗 Share this article

Two well-known critics of former President Trump secured significant court wins on the start of the week when a US judge threw out the federal indictments against them.

For weeks following their charges, ex-FBI chief James Comey and NY AG Letitia James have maintained fiercely that they are innocent, asserting that the administration and DOJ are merely targeting them for revenge.

US District Judge Cameron Currie tossed the indictments against them due to prosecutor Lindsey Halligan's improper appointment as US attorney. But she also left open the possibility for the government to refile the case.

• Court throws out cases against former FBI chief Comey and New York AG James
• US judge says DOJ errors may have tainted the Comey trial
• What is former FBI head James Comey charged with?

Comey acknowledged that possibility after the decision, saying he thinks the former president is likely to target him again.

And White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson appeared to agree: This isn't the last chapter on this issue.

But the DOJ faces steep hurdles to effectively try both after this defeat, and legal analysts hesitate to forecast what could happen next due to the cases' unprecedented nature.

It feels to me like unexplored legal ground, stated Kay Levine, Emory University School of Law professor.

Could the justice department appeal?

The DOJ can contest the judge's decision before a higher appeals court. In this case, that would be the Fourth Circuit Appeals Court.

Attorney General Pam Bondi indicated she would take this route, pledging to use all legal means, including an expedited appeal.

In other cases, the Trump administration has aggressively appealed unfavourable rulings, moving cases from trial courts and sometimes fast-tracking its petitions up to the US Supreme Court.

Attorney Abbe Lowell, James's lawyer, pledged to keep fighting any additional politically motivated charges through all legal avenues.

In the event of an appeal, the DOJ probably would have its own attorneys present the arguments, making Halligan's involvement in the appeal uncertain.

Is it possible there be fresh indictments?

The government charged James Comey with lying to Congress and obstructing justice. Government lawyers indicted Letitia James with financial fraud and making false statements to a bank.

Both pleaded not guilty. Besides arguing Halligan's appointment was invalid, they also asserted to be victims of retaliatory legal action.

Since the initial charges were dismissed (although appeals might alter this), the DOJ might try to assemble fresh grand juries and obtain new charges.

Based on my analysis, a new prosecutor could present James's case to a different grand jury and secure a new indictment, said Ms Levine.

But legal expert John Day, head of the American College of Trial Lawyers, said it could be a complex process – certainly in Comey's case.

It's clear that it will be hotly contested, whether Mr Comey's case can be recharged if a lawfully appointed prosecutor is assigned and is able to secure an indictment.

He characterized the complex web of attorneys, judges, and legal filings involved as a procedural morass with no easy solutions.

It might be harder for the government to try to bring the identical accusations against James Comey.

A key issue is the legal time limit – the deadline that prosecutors had to indict Comey for these particular claims – which ended at the end of September. However, the dismissal of the charges would activate a half-year extension for the DOJ to refile the case.

Still in that case, his legal team said it intends to argue the government is out of time.

The ruling also suggests that since the charge is invalid, the time limit has expired and there can be no further indictment, attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said on Monday.

What is the fate of Lindsey Halligan?

In both decisions on the charges against Comey and James, Judge Currie was blunt: Halligan was wrongly appointed.

Judge Currie wrote in the James ruling that the AG's effort to appoint Halligan as Acting US Attorney for the Virginia Eastern District was unlawful.

As a result, Halligan had no lawful authority to file the charges, she wrote.

Federal prosecutors are proposed by the US president and need US Senate confirmation. Federal statutes regulate how individuals can be appointed on a interim basis, but the judge determined that Halligan's appointment had violated these laws.

This makes Halligan's role on future cases against James and Comey, again, unclear.

The decision might also raise doubts on other cases Halligan has brought in the Eastern District of Virginia where she serves.

But Attorney General Bondi said on that day that she designated Halligan a special US attorney and commended her work as excellent.

The White House stood by its stance that Halligan was lawfully appointed, press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday.