WASHINGTON – More than a week after a federal judge tossed the Trump management’s cases against two of the president’s top political foes,the Justice Department is weighing whether to re-indict former FBI director James Comey adn New York Attorney General Letitia James.
And the Justice Department is considering taking that step without the legal complications caused by the previous “unlawful” actions of Lindsey Halligan as the purported top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Nov. 24 that the Justice Department would file an “immediate appeal” of a federal judge’s order dismissing the cases against Comey and James. But prosecutors have yet to do so.
A source familiar with the deliberations said Tuesday that the department is considering seeking new, untainted indictments instead of pursuing the appeals. CNN and Reuters previously reported on the deliberations.
A Justice Department representative declined to comment.
Former prosecutors and legal experts told NBC News that bringing fresh cases might be a cleaner path to pursuing the matter, although both cases will continue to face significant challenges, including arguments that they represent selective and vindictive prosecutions. The five-year statute of limitations on Comey’s 2020 testimony before Congress – the basis for his September indictment – has now expired, but a provision of federal law gives prosecutors an extra six months to secure an indictment after it is dismissed in some circumstances.
Even if the Justice Department persuades another federal grand jury to indict Comey, a core issue will be whether there was an initial indictment, given that a judge found that Halligan – who took the unusual step of obtaining the indictment on her own – was unlawfully appointed. Time is less essential in James’ case over an alleged mortgage-related issue, as the statute of limitations most likely wouldn’t expire until at least March.
Comey and James both pleaded not guilty.
Professor David richman Alleges Second Warrantless Search of Files, Citing Constitutional Concerns
A legal battle is brewing over the handling of files belonging to Professor David Richman, as his attorneys allege a second warrantless search by the government in September 2025. This alleged search,detailed in a memorandum in support filed with the court, is claimed to be a violation of both constitutional rules and attorney-client privilege.
The case echoes concerns raised in a related matter involving former FBI Director James Comey. Last month, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick found that in the Comey case, the government “likely” seized material beyond the scope of its original search warrants. Richman’s lawyers argue that the government’s actions have “deprived Professor Richman of his constitutional rights.”
According to the memorandum, Richman’s legal team is requesting the court to order the return of all seized files, including any copies, and to prevent the government from using the materials obtained in the alleged improper searches.
A federal judge has requested Richman to file a motion for a temporary restraining order before ruling on the matter.
The allegations come years after President Donald Trump fired James Comey as FBI director in 2017.
This is a developing story and will be updated as more information becomes available.
Sources:
* Memorandum in Support of Motion for Return of property – CourtListener
* NBC News: Professor David Richman alleges second warrantless search of files – NBC News