Harry Litman - After the shipwreck
Five Questions in the Wake of the Comey and James Dismissal
Predictable though they may have been, the dismissals of the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James were still thunderous. Judge Cameron McGowan Currie held that Lindsey Halligans appointment as U.S. Attorney violated the statutory scheme Congress created to govern vacancies in federal prosecutorial offices. Her decision brought to a crashing halt the most corrupt actions yet undertaken by the Trump-Bondi Justice Department and left DOJ staring at wreckage it now must somehow navigate.
Curries analysis was meticulous. She emphasized that Congress had constructed a detailed statutory schemea sequence of default rules, limits, and checks designed to prevent the kind of end-run the administration attempted here. After an initial 120-day interim appointment expires, the baton passes to the district court, which may appoint a temporary U.S. Attorney who serves until Senate confirmation. That 120-day clock had already been exhausted by Eric Siebert, the career prosecutorand Trumps previous choice to head the officefired for refusing to pursue a political reprisal case against Comey.
The governments contrary theory, Currie wrote, would turn the structure on its head, letting a President indefinitely cycle unconfirmable loyalists through contrived acting or interim posts. Currie also found a separate Appointments Clause violation. The clause permits Congress by law to provide for appointment of inferior officers (such as U.S. Attorneys), but Halligans extra-statutory position was not created by law. And Bondis late-filed ratification, purporting to retroactively appoint her to a different role, was meaningless, since Halligan was never lawfully in office.
Moreover, even for the most fervent unitary executive jocks, the presence of the contrary appointment power in the Constitution itself swats away the claim that Congresss scheme violates Article II.
https://harrylitman.substack.com/p/after-the-shipwreck