WASHINGTON – More than a week after a federal judge dismissed the Trump administration’s cases against two of the president’s top political enemies, the Justice Department is weighing whether to re-indict former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
And the Justice Department is considering taking that step without the legal complications caused by Lindsey Halligan’s previous “illegal” actions as the alleged top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said Nov. 24 that the Justice Department would file an “immediate appeal” of a federal judge’s order dismissing the cases against Comey and James. But prosecutors have not done so yet.
A source familiar with the deliberations said Tuesday that the department is considering seeking new untainted indictments rather than continuing with appeals. CNN and Reuters previously reported on the deliberations.
A Justice Department representative declined to comment.
Former prosecutors and legal experts told NBC News that filing new cases could be a cleaner path forward in the matter, although both cases will continue to face significant challenges, including arguments that they represent selective and vindictive prosecutions. The five-year statute of limitations on Comey’s testimony before Congress in 2020, the basis of his September indictment, has already expired, but a provision of federal law gives prosecutors an additional six months to obtain an indictment after it is dismissed in some circumstances.
Even if the Justice Department persuades another federal grand jury to indict Comey, a central question will be whether there was an initial indictment, given that a judge determined that Halligan, who took the unusual step of obtaining the indictment on her own, was illegally appointed. Time is less of the essence in James’ case over an alleged mortgage-related issue, as the statute of limitations likely wouldn’t expire until at least March.
Comey and James pleaded not guilty.
U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie ruled last month that Halligan had “no legal authority” to bring charges and that his “flawed appointment” should be vacated.
Meanwhile, Comey’s legal advisor, Daniel Richman, is asking a federal judge to order the return of property seized more than six years ago. In a memo supporting the return of his property, Richman’s lawyers said the government “conducted a new warrantless search of Professor Richman’s files in September 2025 in violation of clear constitutional rules and attorney-client privilege.”
President Donald Trump fired Comey as FBI director in 2017.
Judge William Fitzpatrick determined in the Comey case last month that the government “probably” seized material outside the purpose and scope of its original search warrants. Richman’s lawyers say the government’s conduct “has deprived Professor Richman of his constitutional rights.”
“The Court should grant Professor Richman’s motion and order the return of the files in question, as well as any copies thereof, and prohibit the government from making any further use of the seized or improperly retained materials,” his lawyers wrote.
A federal judge on Tuesday asked Richman to file a motion for a temporary restraining order before ruling.
Gary Grumbach contributed.
