United States v. James Comey
Case Overview
The government appealed Senior United States District Judge McGowan Currie's orders granting Comey and James' motions to dismiss which also found that Lindsey Halligan's appointment to serve as U.S. attorney was unlawful. The appeals were consolidated on Jan. 12, 2026.
BrynoDC Coverage 5 videos
The Application
District Judge McGowan Currie found both that the dismissal motions had merit and that Halligan lacked proper authority to serve as U.S. attorney, prompting the government's appeal of both determinations to the Fourth Circuit.
The Conclusion
The consolidated appeal remains active in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals as of January 12, 2026, challenging the dismissal orders and the adverse ruling on the appointment.
Case Analysis
Overview
The government appealed Senior United States District Judge McGowan Currie's orders granting Comey and James' motions to dismiss which also found that Lindsey Halligan's appointment to serve as U.S. attorney was unlawful. The appeals were consolidated on Jan. 12, 2026.
Issue
Whether the District Court properly granted motions to dismiss the charges against Comey and James, and whether the appointment of Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney was constitutionally lawful.
Rule
Dismissals of criminal charges are reviewed de novo on appeal; an official's appointment violates the Appointments Clause if made by someone lacking constitutional authority.
Analysis
District Judge McGowan Currie found both that the dismissal motions had merit and that Halligan lacked proper authority to serve as U.S. attorney, prompting the government's appeal of both determinations to the Fourth Circuit.
Conclusion
The consolidated appeal remains active in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals as of January 12, 2026, challenging the dismissal orders and the adverse ruling on the appointment.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support