Federal judges in Virginia are criticizing the Justice Department for acting as if Lindsey Halligan is still the top federal prosecutor, even after a court ruling said she was never lawfully in the job.
In a series of hearings this week in Alexandria, two magistrate judges and a district court judge told prosecutors they do not want to see Halligan’s name on new criminal filings, including plea deals and indictments, and in some cases have literally crossed her name out from the bench.
Their frustration comes less than two weeks after Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed high profile criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that Halligan had been “unlawfully serving in that role” as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.
One of the judges in Alexandria, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, made his position crystal clear at a criminal hearing on Tuesday. Filing charging papers “under Ms. Halligan’s name” at this point “is simply not acceptable,” he told prosecutors, according to a transcript obtained by CNN.
Fitzpatrick went even further, reminding the government that Currie’s ruling is already in effect and has not been put on hold. “The law in this district right now is that she is not and has not been the United States Attorney,” he said.
Another judge, U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, also questioned why Halligan’s name was still appearing on paperwork after a decision that knocked out her authority and wiped away two of the Trump administration’s most politically explosive prosecutions. Both judges noted that the Justice Department has not yet appealed Currie’s ruling or asked any court to pause it while they decide what to do next.
Lindsey Halligan, the newly-installed US Attorney prosecuting James Comey at Trump’s direction, is an insurance attorney and a Miss Colorado finalist. She has never prosecuted a case. pic.twitter.com/bZl0mn8mjZ
— Molly Ploofkins (@Mollyploofkins) September 26, 2025
Halligan, a former personal lawyer to President Donald Trump with no prior prosecutorial experience, was installed as interim U.S. attorney in September after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, was forced out following his resistance to bringing cases against Trump’s political enemies.
Currie’s November 24 ruling found that Halligan’s appointment violated the federal law that limits how long an interim U.S. attorney can serve without Senate confirmation. Once the 120 day clock expired on Siebert’s earlier interim appointment, the power to fill the vacancy shifted to the district court, not the attorney general, the judge wrote. That meant Halligan never had lawful authority and that the indictments she signed against Comey and James had to be tossed.
The decision was widely described as an extraordinary rebuke of Trump’s effort to sidestep the normal confirmation process and install political loyalists in powerful prosecutor jobs. Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, blasted the appointment in a statement, saying Trump had “forced a qualified U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia to resign so he could appoint an unqualified replacement with no prosecutorial experience who isn’t even licensed to practice law in Virginia.”
The Justice Department is still weighing whether to appeal Currie’s decision. Trial judges insist that the law of the district is clear, and a Justice Department that has not fully adjusted its paperwork, or its posture, to match the ruling.
Halligan brief tenure as Trump’s chosen prosecutor has already led to two dismissed indictments and a flurry of critical coverage, the latest rebuke comes not in a sweeping opinion but in the day to day work of the court, where her name is literally being scratched off the page.
