A federal judge in Virginia has ordered a lawyer appointed by former President Donald Trump to explain within a week why she is still holding herself out as a US attorney, after another judge ruled her appointment was invalid. The order raises serious questions of professional misconduct.
Failed Prosecutions and an Unlawful Appointment
Lindsey Halligan, who was formerly the most junior member of Trump's personal legal team, was installed by the president in September to lead high-profile prosecutions. Her targets were two of Trump's frequent political adversaries: Letitia James, the New York Attorney General, and James Comey, the former FBI Director.
However, in a scathing ruling in November, Federal Judge Cameron McGowan Currie threw out both cases. Judge Currie found that Halligan's installation as the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid, declaring all actions stemming from it as "unlawful exercises of executive power" that must be set aside.
A New Judicial Rebuke
Despite this precedent, Halligan continued to sign legal documents using the contested title. This prompted a new order on Tuesday from District Court Judge David Novak in an unrelated case.
Judge Novak's three-page directive is unequivocal. He noted that while the Justice Department has appealed Judge Currie's decision, no stay has been issued, meaning the ruling remains binding. Novak gave Halligan seven days to file a formal explanation for why she continues to identify herself as the US Attorney.
The judge also demanded she "explain why her identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement", noting that making such a statement would be professional misconduct warranting disciplinary action.
Broader Pattern of Investigative Missteps
The controversy around Halligan's tenure extends beyond her appointment's legality. In November, another federal judge, William Fitzpatrick, cited evidence of "government misconduct" during the investigation into James Comey.
Judge Fitzpatrick highlighted a "disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps", which included Halligan making "fundamental misstatements of the law" to a grand jury and the use of potentially privileged communications.
The core legal flaw, as identified by Judge Currie, stems from the Appointments Clause. By law, an interim US attorney must be confirmed by the Senate within 120 days. Halligan's predecessor, Erik Siebert, had already served that interim period, which Currie found nullified Halligan's subsequent appointment.
Attempts by the Trump administration in December to push Halligan towards Senate confirmation were blocked by Virginia's two Democratic senators, Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, who refused to return the necessary procedural paperwork.
The Justice Department maintains Halligan's appointment was lawful and has appealed the dismissals of the cases against James and Comey. However, as Judge Novak's latest order underscores, the cloud over her authority and the conduct of these prosecutions remains a significant legal and political issue.
