Federal judges in Alexandria, Virginia, are openly criticizing the Justice Department for continuing to list Lindsey Halligan as US attorney on criminal court filings, with some judges going so far as to strike her name from documents in real time from the bench.
Two magistrate judges and a district court judge have told prosecutors in open court that Halligan’s name should not appear on new criminal case filings — including plea agreements and indictments — after a recent ruling in the district concluded she is not the US attorney.
At a hearing on Tuesday, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick said it was “simply not acceptable” for prosecutors to file criminal charging papers “under Ms. Halligan’s name” at this point, according to a transcript obtained by CNN.
Fitzpatrick and another judge in the district, Michael Nachmanoff, each said this week that they believed the ruling clearly held that Halligan is not the US attorney for any cases. In separate hearings, they also noted that the Justice Department has neither appealed the decision nor asked any court to pause it while an appeal is considered.
“The law in this district right now is that she is not and has not been the United States Attorney,” Fitzpatrick said on Tuesday.
The ruling that upended Halligan’s status came last week from Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, who found that Halligan was not lawfully serving as US attorney because she was neither confirmed by the Senate within 120 days of the vacancy nor sworn in by the judges of the court. Currie’s opinion also threw out the criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, calling Halligan’s work on those prosecutions “void.”
Comey had pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to Congress, while James had pleaded not guilty to mortgage fraud.
Nachmanoff, who presided over Comey’s case at the trial level, ruled in a separate hearing on Thursday — involving a Honduran man accused of being in the US illegally — that Halligan’s name must be removed from the records in that case.
He said he found it “difficult to reconcile” the court’s written opinion with the Justice Department’s ongoing practice, according to a transcript of the Thursday hearing.
The Justice Department has been asked for comment.
Judges Start Striking and Annotating Halligan’s Name
During other criminal hearings on Tuesday, Fitzpatrick informed one prosecutor that he would strike Halligan’s name from criminal court documents. In another proceeding, Magistrate Judge Lindsey Vaala said she would accept new indictments but annotate them to reflect the ruling on Halligan.
The exchanges, captured on official courtroom audio and obtained by CNN, highlight the ongoing absence of a clear, public explanation from Justice Department leadership for why it believes Halligan may continue to serve in the role.
“I agree with you that it is peculiar and we are in unusual territory,” Vaala told another prosecutor later that afternoon as she reviewed newly returned indictments from the grand jury. She said her concern was accepting indictments with a signature block that conflicts with Currie’s decision.
Vaala said she would place an asterisk next to Halligan’s name and add “a citation to Judge Currie’s decisions.”
“That’s perfectly fine with us, your honor,” prosecutor Tony Roberts responded.
Court records show that at least two new criminal indictments filed this week now carry a footnote next to Halligan’s name, referencing the decision in the Comey and James matters.
Fallout From the Comey and James Dismissals
The turmoil over Justice Department signatures comes in the wake of the dismissal of the criminal cases against Comey and James. Halligan secured both indictments in solo grand jury sessions, just days after President Donald Trump publicly demanded prosecutions of his political opponents and Attorney General Pam Bondi placed Halligan in the US Attorney’s Office in Alexandria.
Despite the dismissals, Justice Department leadership has continued to stand behind Halligan in public.
Halligan’s office is expected to move soon to seek a new grand jury indictment of Comey on allegations that he made false statements to Congress. A grand jury in the district declined on Thursday to charge James a second time, but prosecutors may try again, CNN has reported.
Unlike the first round of indictments, Halligan is not expected to personally lead the renewed grand jury presentations. Instead, other career prosecutors are likely to handle the cases in court.
In the meantime, the US Attorney’s Office has issued at least five rounds of internal guidance emails since last week, instructing its dozens of prosecutors how to sign filings in light of Currie’s ruling. Initially, prosecutors were told to remove Halligan’s name and list only the top career prosecutor in the office, the first assistant US attorney.
More recently, new guidance has directed prosecutors to list Halligan first in the signature block, followed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and the first assistant.
Sparse Legal Justification, Frustrated Prosecutors
From the perspective of line prosecutors appearing in court, the Justice Department has offered little substantive legal explanation for continuing to place Halligan’s name on criminal filings.
Veteran prosecutor Tony Roberts told one judge that guidance from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel — which provides legal opinions and policy interpretations for the executive branch — instructed the office to keep Halligan’s “name as is.”
“The Office of Legal Counsel told us to put the name as is as it has been presented on these indictments. That’s what we are going on at this point,” Roberts said in court on Tuesday, according to records obtained by CNN.
“I believe there’s still internal deliberation what next steps the office needs to take. I understand that it’s peculiar,” he added. “It’s something I’ve never seen in my 35 years, but we are following the Office of Legal Counsel’s guidance on this, and it’s not just purely an in-office decision.”
A Justice Department official previously told CNN that, after Currie’s ruling, DOJ prepared guidance for the entire Alexandria office asserting that Halligan remained the US attorney.
Even so, prosecutors there have said they feel uninformed and rattled by the increasingly pointed questions they are facing from judges this week, according to sources familiar with the office.
“You’re in a terrible situation,” Fitzpatrick told one Eastern District of Virginia prosecutor on Thursday, according to court transcripts. “And the fact that you have no guidance is tremendously disappointing, and that you have to stand here and take the brunt of this is patently unfair.”
