🔗 Share this article

Two well-known opponents of President Trump secured significant court wins on the start of the week when a federal judge threw out the government's charges filed against them.

Over recent weeks following their charges, ex-FBI chief James Comey and NY AG Letitia James have argued vehemently that they are innocent, claiming that the president and justice department are simply singling out them for retaliation.

Federal Judge Cameron Currie tossed the indictments against them due to prosecutor Lindsey Halligan's improper appointment as federal prosecutor. However, she left the door open for the government to refile the case.

• Court throws out charges against former FBI chief Comey and New York AG James
• Federal judge states government 'missteps' may have tainted the Comey trial
• What are ex-FBI director James Comey accused of?

Comey acknowledged that likelihood after the decision, stating he thinks the former president is likely to come after him once more.

And White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson appeared to agree: This isn't the final word on this issue.

But the DOJ confronts steep hurdles to effectively try either after this defeat, and legal analysts are reluctant to predict what could happen next due to the cases' unprecedented nature.

In my view, it's uncharted territory, stated Professor Kay Levine, law professor at Emory University.

Could the DOJ appeal?

The DOJ can challenge the judge's decision before a federal appeals court. In this instance, that would be the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi signaled she would pursue this option, pledging to use all available legal action, including an immediate appeal.

Previously, the Trump administration has aggressively appealed adverse decisions, taking cases from lower courts and sometimes accelerating its petitions up to the US Supreme Court.

Abbe Lowell, James's lawyer, vowed to keep fighting any additional politically driven indictments through all legal avenues.

In the event of an appeal, the justice department probably would have its own attorneys argue the case, making Halligan's role in the appeals process uncertain.

Could there be new charges?

The federal prosecutors accused James Comey with making false statements to lawmakers and obstruction of justice. Government lawyers indicted Letitia James with financial fraud and providing false information to a bank.

Both pleaded not guilty. Besides claiming Halligan was unlawfully appointed, they also claimed to be victims of vindictive prosecution.

Since the initial charges were dismissed (although appeals might alter this), the government might try to convene fresh grand juries and secure new charges.

Based on my analysis, a different attorney could bring James' case to a new grand jury and secure a fresh indictment, stated Ms Levine.

But John Day, president of the American College of Trial Lawyers, said it could be a complicated path – especially in Comey's case.

I can tell you it will be strongly disputed, whether Mr Comey's case can be recharged if a properly assigned attorney is assigned and is able to secure an charge.

He described the complex web of attorneys, judges, and legal filings involved as a legal quagmire with no simple answers.

It could be more difficult for the government to try to file the identical accusations against Comey.

One problem is the legal time limit – the time frame that prosecutors had to indict him for these specific allegations – which ended at the close of September. However, the indictment's dismissal would activate a six-month grace period for the justice department to refile the case.

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

The decision further indicates that since the indictment is void, the statute of limitations has expired and there can be no new indictment, lawyer Patrick Fitzgerald said on Monday.

What is the fate of Lindsey Halligan?

In both decisions on the indictments against James and Comey, the judge was blunt: Halligan's appointment was improper.

The judge stated in the James decision that the Attorney General's attempt to appoint Halligan as Interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid.

As a result, she lacked legal power to present the indictment, she wrote.

Federal prosecutors are nominated by the president and need US Senate confirmation. Federal statutes govern how individuals can be assigned on a temporary basis, but the judge determined that Halligan's assignment had violated these laws.

This makes Halligan's role on subsequent cases against James and Comey, once more, unclear.

The decision might also cast a shadow on any other cases Halligan has prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia where she works.

But Attorney General Bondi said on Monday that she made Halligan a special federal prosecutor and praised her work as excellent.

The administration maintained its position that Halligan's appointment was legal, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday.