Judge orders Lindsey Halligan to explain why she’s still serving as U.S. attorney after previous ruling against her
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Trump ally Lindsey Halligan to explain why she continues to call herself the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. another judge ruled He said he was appointed to this position unlawfully in November.
U.S. District Judge David Novak of Richmond issued a three-page order demanding to know why Halligan was still on the job. Halligan, who unsuccessfully sued former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, is also named the U.S. attorney. Ministry of Justice in official documents.
The judge’s decision is unusual because he made the decision on his own and not at the request of defense attorneys. This comes in a case involving a carjacking and attempted bank robbery suspect who was charged last month.
Novak gave Halligan seven days to respond in writing: “Explaining the basis for identifying herself as the Attorney General of the United States, despite Judge Currie’s contrary ruling. She will also explain the reasons why this Court should not omit Ms. Halligan’s identification of herself as the Attorney General of the United States from the indictment in this matter.”
The judge’s order said Halligan “will explain why his identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement.” Novak also addressed potential disciplinary action and demanded that Halligan sign his response.
The U.S. attorney’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday night.
In late November, U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie found that the Justice Department violated the Constitution by appointing Halligan as U.S. attorney. This finding led to the dismissal of criminal cases against Comey and James.
Currie ruled that “resulting from Ms. Halligan’s erroneous appointment was an unlawful exercise of executive authority, including securing and signing Mr. Comey’s indictment.” He issued a similar ruling in the James case, saying Halligan was exercising authority he “did not legally have.”
Novak said Tuesday that the November decision to appoint Halligan was appealed But he said that because the order was not paused, it “remains a binding precedent for the region and cannot be ignored.”
Other judges in the district had previously expressed disappointment with Halligan; one of them now puts an asterisk next to Halligan’s name in every court document and references Currie’s November decision next to it.
This article was first published on: NBCNews.com
