🔗 Share this article

A pair of high-profile critics of President Trump secured major legal victories on the start of the week when a federal judge dismissed the federal indictments filed against them.

For weeks since their indictments, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have insisted fiercely that they are innocent, claiming that the president and justice department are merely singling out them for revenge.

US District Judge Cameron Currie dismissed the indictments against them due to prosecutor Lindsey Halligan's invalid assignment as federal prosecutor. But she also left the door open for the government to refile the case.

• Court throws out charges against ex-FBI director Comey and New York AG James
• US judge says DOJ errors may have tainted Comey case
• What is former FBI head James Comey accused of?

Comey admitted that possibility after the decision, saying he thinks the former president will probably come after him once more.

And White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson appeared to agree: This isn't the last chapter on this matter.

But the government faces significant hurdles to successfully prosecute either after this defeat, and experts hesitate to forecast what could occur next due to the unprecedented circumstances of the cases.

In my view, it's unexplored legal ground, stated Kay Levine, law professor at Emory University.

Could the DOJ appeal?

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

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

Previously, the former administration has aggressively appealed unfavourable rulings, taking cases from trial courts and sometimes fast-tracking its requests up to the Supreme Court.

Attorney Abbe Lowell, James's lawyer, pledged to keep fighting any further politically driven indictments through all legal avenues.

If there is an appeals process, the justice department probably would have its own attorneys argue the case, making Halligan's involvement in the appeals process uncertain.

Could there be new charges?

The government charged James Comey with making false statements to Congress and obstructing justice. Government lawyers charged Letitia James with financial fraud and making false statements to a bank.

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

With the original indictments thrown out (though, of course, appeals could change that), the DOJ might try to convene fresh grand juries and secure new charges.

As far as everything I've seen, a new prosecutor could bring James' case to a different grand jury and secure a new indictment, stated Professor Levine.

But legal expert John Day, head of the American College of Trial Lawyers, said it could be a complex process – certainly in Comey's case.

It's clear that it will be hotly contested, whether Comey's case can be re-indicted if a lawfully appointed prosecutor is assigned and is can obtain an charge.

He described the tangle of attorneys, judges, and legal filings involved as a procedural morass with no simple answers.

It might be harder for the government to try to file the identical accusations against James Comey.

A key issue is the statute of limitations – the deadline that government lawyers had to indict Comey for these specific allegations – which ended at the end of September. However, the indictment's dismissal would trigger a half-year extension for the DOJ to refile the case.

Still in that case, his legal team said it intends to argue the prosecution is out of time.

The decision further indicates that since the indictment is invalid, the time limit has run and there can be no new indictment, lawyer Patrick Fitzgerald said on Monday.

What happens to Lindsey Halligan?

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

The judge stated in the James ruling that the AG's effort to install Halligan as Interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid.

Therefore, she had no lawful authority to present the indictment, the judge wrote.

Federal prosecutors are nominated by the US president and require Senate approval. Federal statutes govern how people can be assigned on a temporary basis, but the judge determined that Halligan's appointment had violated these regulations.

That leaves Halligan's role on subsequent cases against James and Comey, once more, uncertain.

The ruling also could raise doubts on any other cases Halligan has prosecuted in the Virginia Eastern District where she serves.

But Bondi said on that day that she designated her a special federal prosecutor and praised her work as excellent.

The White House stood by its stance that Halligan was lawfully appointed, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday.