James Comey and Letitia James thought they just scored the biggest victory of their lives.
A Clinton-appointed judge handed them exactly what they wanted.
But James Comey and Letitia James got bad news that wiped the smiles off their faces.
Judge tosses cases but leaves door wide open
Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed the criminal indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Comey faced charges of lying to Congress about leaking FBI information to the media during his 2020 Senate testimony.
James was indicted for allegedly misrepresenting a Virginia home purchase to secure a lower mortgage rate.
The judge ruled that interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan was improperly appointed to her position, making all her actions unlawful.
Halligan took over after President Trump forced out Erik Siebert, who refused to bring the charges.
Under federal law, interim U.S. attorneys can only serve 120 days.
Currie determined the 120-day clock started with Siebert's appointment in January, meaning Attorney General Pam Bondi no longer had authority to install Halligan when she did so in September.
"All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment, including securing and signing Ms. James's indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside," Currie wrote.¹
Comey and James immediately celebrated on social media.
James posted she was "heartened by today's victory."²
Comey declared the prosecution was "based on malevolence and incompetence."³
That's when George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley stepped in to burst their bubble on Fox News.
Jonathan Turley delivers reality check nobody saw coming
Turley told "America Reports" hosts that Comey and James were "celebrating a tad too early" because the dismissal wasn't about the merits of the charges.⁴
"The problems here are not with the charges themselves, but essentially with the cop, or in this case the prosecutor," Turley explained.⁴
The judge dismissed the cases "without prejudice" – legal terminology that means prosecutors can refile the exact same charges once they get someone properly appointed.
"So the court is not saying that she was innocent of these charges," Turley said about James. "The court is simply saying that the person who signed off on the charges didn't have authority to do that."⁴
Turley laid out exactly how Attorney General Bondi can salvage the prosecutions.
"The obvious thing here is to get someone who is lawfully in a position to perform this role," Turley stated.⁴
The Trump Administration can appeal Judge Currie's ruling or have a properly appointed U.S. attorney take the cases back to a grand jury.
Bondi made clear during a press conference in Memphis that she's not backing down.
"We'll be taking all available legal action, including an immediate appeal, to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct," Bondi declared.⁵
The clock is ticking on one case but not the other
There's one major difference between the Comey and James prosecutions.
The five-year statute of limitations for Comey's charges expired at the end of September – right after Halligan secured his indictment.
Comey's attorney Patrick Fitzgerald argued that because the indictment was void, the statute of limitations kept running and Comey can never be charged again.
But the Justice Department pointed to federal statute 3288, which gives prosecutors six months to refile charges after a dismissal – even if the original statute of limitations expired.
"They are already past the original date, but the argument is they do have the right to go back to the grand jury," Turley noted. "They may say, we think we have a good argument here, that yes, there's that 120 days, but we had some rather novel sort of shifts that occurred here that we believe do not trigger that final date."⁴
James faces no such protection because mortgage fraud carries a 10-year statute of limitations.
Her charges are well within that window, making her vulnerable to a new indictment.
Turley hammered home why the rushed nature of these indictments created problems.
"Everything about this indictment seems to be rather rushed into – and improvisational," Turley observed. "When the Comey indictment came down, I noted that it seemed sort of disjunctive. They took out this count and the other two counts did not exactly fit neatly together."⁴
That sloppiness gave the judge concerns about the entire prosecution.
But none of that means Comey and James are home free.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters the Justice Department will appeal "very soon" and insisted Halligan was "legally appointed."⁶
The administration also made Halligan a "special attorney" to shore up her authority.
Judge Currie's ruling doesn't prevent the Trump Administration from finding a path forward with a prosecutor whose appointment can't be challenged.
Comey and James are learning the hard way that a dismissal "without prejudice" isn't the same as an acquittal.
¹ CNN, "Federal judge dismisses indictments against Letitia James and James Comey," November 24, 2025.
² ABC News, "Judge tosses indictments against James Comey and Letitia James," November 24, 2025.
³ Ibid.
⁴ Daily Caller, "Jonathan Turley Says James Comey, Letitia James Aren't Out Of Woods After Judge Drops Charges," November 24, 2025.
⁵ Fox News, "Bondi vows appeal after Comey, James indictments dismissed by judge," November 24, 2025.
⁶ NPR, "Judge tosses Comey, James cases after finding prosecutor unlawfully appointed," November 24, 2025.
