A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Trump ally Lindsey Halligan to explain why she continues to call herself the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia even though another judge determined in November she was illegally appointed to this position.
U.S. District Judge David Novak of Richmond issued a three-page order demanding an explanation for why Halligan was still in the position. Halligan, who unsuccessfully prosecuted former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, is also listed as U.S. attorney. Ministry of Justice in official documents.
The judge's order is unusual in that he made it himself, rather than at the request of lawyers. The case involves a car theft and attempted bank robbery suspect who was indicted last month.
Novak gave Halligan seven days to respond in writing, “explaining the basis for … identifying herself as the United States Attorney despite Judge Curry's ruling to the contrary. She must also set forth the reasons why this Court should not exclude Ms. Halligan's designation as the United States Attorney from the indictment in this case.”
The judge's order goes on to say that Halligan “must further explain why her identity is not a false or misleading statement.” Novak also mentioned possible disciplinary action and demanded that Halligan sign her response.
The U.S. Attorney's Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday evening.
In late November, U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Curry found that the Justice Department had violated the Constitution by appointing Halligan as U.S. attorney. This discovery led to the dismissal of criminal cases against Comey and James.
Curry ruled that all actions “resulting from Ms. Halligan's misappointment, including securing and signing Mr. Comey's indictment, were an unlawful exercise of executive power.” She made a separate, similar ruling in James' case, saying Halligan had exercised power that she “did not have under the law.”
Novak acknowledged Tuesday that the November decision regarding Halligan's appointment was appealed but said that since the order was not suspended, it remains “binding county precedent and cannot be ignored.”
Other county judges have previously expressed their disappointment with Halligan, including one who now puts an asterisk next to Halligan's name on every court filing and next to it a reference to Curry's November decision.
