Letitia James and James Comey’s Legal Fights Aren’t Over Yet, Despite Judge’s Snag [WATCH]

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley stated on Monday, November 24, 2025, that former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James might still face charges, despite a federal judge’s ruling that interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan was improperly appointed.

The comments came during an appearance on “America Reports” with hosts John Roberts and Sandra Smith.

The legal issues stem from recent indictments. James was charged in October with mortgage fraud related to her purchase of a house in Virginia.

Comey faced indictment in September on charges of obstruction and lying to Congress.

However, Senior United States District Judge Cameron Currie, a Clinton appointee in the Eastern District of Virginia, dismissed both cases, citing that Halligan lacked authority to serve as interim U.S. attorney.

Currie’s decision hinged on the fact that Halligan’s predecessor, Erik Siebert, had exceeded the 120-day limit for an interim prosecutor under the relevant statute.

Turley explained the situation, noting the dismissal was procedural rather than a judgment on the charges’ merits.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

“Letitia James might be celebrating a tad too early. The problems here are not with the charges themselves, but essentially with the cop, or in this case the prosecutor,” he said.

“So the court is not saying that she did – that she was innocent of these charges. The court is simply saying that the person who signed off on the charges didn’t have authority to do that. So the obvious thing here is to get someone who is lawfully in a position to perform this role.”

He further elaborated on the legal pathway forward. “Usually after 120 days, the district court appoints someone as the replacement. They are going to have to work this one out,” Turley continued.

“It’s rather uncharted territory here to make sure that the next person who signs is going to be beyond these types of questions. They could also appeal. They are already past the original date, but the argument is they do have the right to go back to the grand jury. 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 and that we had the ability to use Halligan in the way that we did.”

Turley also commented on the rushed nature of the indictments. “Everything about this indictment seems to be rather rushed into – and improvisational,” he said.

“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 and you got a sense of how quickly they had to get this through and that, I think, sat badly with this judge.”

The ruling by Judge Currie has left the cases in limbo, with no immediate resolution on whether new charges will be pursued.

Halligan’s appointment followed Siebert’s resignation, which occurred after pressure to bring cases against Comey and James.

The legal process now hinges on appointing a properly authorized prosecutor, with potential appeals or a return to the grand jury under consideration.

Turley’s analysis suggests the possibility of re-filing charges, depending on how authorities address the appointment issue.

The cases have drawn significant attention due to the high-profile nature of Comey and James, both of whom have faced scrutiny in recent years.

🚨 BREAKING: Karoline Leavitt gives NUCLEAR response to James Comey taking a victory lap that his indictment was dismissed over “procedural issues”

“The DOJ WILL BE APPEALING this in VERY short order!”

“Maybe James Comey should pump the BRAKES on his victory lap!”

GOOD! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/Z5tYtzgcum

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 24, 2025