Judge warns Comey case may be dismissed over DOJ’s unusual conduct

A judge on Monday ordered the Department of Justice to hand over grand jury material to former FBI Director James Comey, an unusual move that the judge said was necessary because of the department’s “highly unusual” activity during the secret grand jury proceedings.

Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick scolded the DOJ in the order for what he said was a glaring mishandling of evidence presented to grand jurors and possible misstatements by the case’s lead prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan.

“The Court is finding that the government’s actions in this case — whether purposeful, reckless, or negligent — raise genuine issues of misconduct, are inextricably linked to the government’s grand jury presentation, and deserve to be fully explored by the defense,” Fitzpatrick wrote.

DOJ SEEKS REMOVAL OF COMEY’S DEFENSE LAWYER, CITING CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The judge also warned that the grand jury proceedings may have been tainted beyond repair and could cause the court to dismiss the indictment. Comey is facing one charge of a false statement to Congress and one charge of obstruction of justice. He has pleaded not guilty and moved to have his case dismissed on several grounds.

The grand jury issue stems from evidence Halligan presented to the grand jury that the judge said improperly stemmed from years-old warrants.

Halligan, a former White House aide and insurance lawyer who had no prior prosecutorial experience, was installed by Trump in September as interim U.S. attorney as part of the DOJ’s rush to fulfill Trump’s demand that Comey be charged before the statutes of limitation expired.

FEDERAL JUDGE VOICES DOUBT ABOUT TRUMP APPOINTEE’S ABILITY TO CHARGE JAMES COMEY, LETITIA JAMES

When presenting the case to the grand jury, Halligan relied on evidence gathered from 2019 and 2020 warrants that were part of a past investigation while, according to the judge, brushing off rules surrounding how investigators and prosecutors are permitted to review and seize information obtained through the warrants.

Fitzpatrick said the DOJ showed a “cavalier attitude” toward the Fourth Amendment, which governs citizens’ privacy rights.

“Inexplicably, the government elected not to seek a new warrant for the 2025 search, even though the 2025 investigation was focused on a different person, was exploring a fundamentally different legal theory, and was predicated on an entirely different set of criminal offenses,” Fitzpatrick wrote. “The Court recognizes that a failure to seek a new warrant under these circumstances is highly unusual.”

He also said that based on transcripts of the grand jury proceedings, Halligan made prejudicial and misleading statements, including conveying to grand jurors that Comey did not have a Fifth Amendment right.

Fitzpatrick granted Comey’s request to review the material underpinning the proceedings, including audio of them, and ordered the DOJ to provide the records to Comey by the end of the day.

The DOJ had argued that Comey’s concerns about the grand jury proceedings were “speculative and unsubstantiated” and did not meet the high threshold required to break grand jury secrecy.