🔗 Share this article

A pair of well-known critics of former President Trump secured major court wins on the start of the week when a federal judge threw out the federal indictments filed against them.

Over recent weeks following their charges, ex-FBI chief James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have insisted fiercely that they are innocent, claiming that the president and justice department are simply singling out them for revenge.

Federal Judge Cameron Currie tossed the charges against them due to attorney Lindsey Halligan's improper assignment as federal prosecutor. However, she left open the possibility for the federal authorities to refile the case.

• Court throws out cases against ex-FBI director Comey and NY attorney general James
• Federal judge states government 'missteps' may have compromised the Comey trial
• What is former FBI head James Comey charged with?

Comey acknowledged that likelihood after the decision, stating he thinks the former president will probably come after him once more.

And White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson seemed to confirm it: This will not be the last chapter on this issue.

But the government confronts significant hurdles to successfully prosecute both after this defeat, and legal analysts hesitate to forecast what could happen next due to the unprecedented circumstances of the cases.

It feels to me like unexplored legal ground, stated Professor Kay Levine, Emory University School of Law professor.

Might the DOJ challenge the ruling?

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

Attorney General Pam Bondi signaled she would take this route, pledging to use all available legal action, including an expedited appeal.

In other cases, the former administration has strongly challenged adverse decisions, taking cases from trial courts and sometimes accelerating its petitions up to the US Supreme Court.

Attorney Abbe Lowell, an attorney representing James, vowed to continue to challenge any further politically driven indictments through all legal avenues.

In the event of an appeals process, the justice department probably would have its own attorneys present the arguments, making Halligan's involvement in the appeals process unclear.

Is it possible there be fresh indictments?

The federal prosecutors accused James Comey with lying to lawmakers and obstructing justice. Government lawyers indicted Letitia James with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution.

Each pleaded not guilty. In addition to claiming Halligan's appointment was invalid, both 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 assemble fresh grand juries and secure new indictments.

As far as everything I've seen, a new prosecutor could bring James' case to a different grand jury and get a new indictment, said Ms 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 properly assigned attorney is appointed and is able to secure an indictment.

He described the complex web of lawyers, judges, and legal filings involved as a legal quagmire with no simple answers.

It might be harder for the government to try to bring the exact same charges against James Comey.

One problem is the legal time limit – the deadline that prosecutors had to indict Comey for these specific allegations – which expired at the close 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 plans to contend the prosecution is out of time.

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

What is the fate of prosecutor Lindsey Halligan?

In both decisions on the charges against James and Comey, Judge Currie was blunt: Halligan was wrongly appointed.

The judge stated in the James ruling that the Attorney General's attempt to appoint Ms. Halligan as Interim US Attorney for the Virginia Eastern District was unlawful.

As a result, Halligan had no lawful authority to present the indictment, she wrote.

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

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

The decision might also cast a shadow on other cases Halligan has prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia where she serves.

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

The White House maintained its position that Halligan was lawfully appointed, press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the press on Monday.