New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey have joined forces to challenge the authority of U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, the federal prosecutor responsible for bringing indictments against both of them.
The two high-profile figures are now questioning the legality of Halligan’s appointment, a move that could potentially undermine the cases against them. A court hearing on their joint challenge is scheduled for next month.
According to CNN, attorneys representing James filed a brief but pointed two-page notice on Thursday, signaling her intent to contest the banking fraud indictment by seeking Halligan’s removal from the case.
“Please take notice that on October 24, 2025, Letitia James, by counsel, will file her motion to dismiss the indictment that challenges the unlawful appointment of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan,” the filing stated.
The motion sets the stage for what could become a significant legal battle over prosecutorial authority—one with implications extending beyond the fates of James and Comey, potentially touching on broader questions of how U.S. attorneys are appointed and empowered to pursue high-profile cases.
BREAKING: The judge presiding over Letitia James’ case has just ALLOWED her motion to dismiss to be consolidated with James Comey’s motion.
“This judge, Jamal Walker, has decided that he is going to grant a request by James’ attorneys to have her motion essentially to… pic.twitter.com/j9gJcfARHV
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) October 24, 2025
A court filing included a footnote noting that former FBI Director James Comey is also seeking to dismiss his indictment by challenging the legality of U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan’s appointment, adding that “the two motions should likely be consolidated.”
According to CBS News, prosecutors allege that New York Attorney General Letitia James purchased a home in Virginia under the pretense that it would serve as her secondary residence, but instead used the property as an income-generating investment. James has pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Comey, meanwhile, has argued that Halligan was “defectively appointed to her office.” Halligan assumed the position following the resignation of Erik Siebert, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Comey’s defense team contends that Halligan’s appointment was invalid because an interim U.S. attorney remained in office beyond the 120-day limit prescribed by law.
Comey faces charges of making false statements to Congress and obstruction of justice, to which he has also pleaded not guilty. His motion to dismiss the indictment is set for a hearing on November 13 before U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie, a Clinton appointee who serves in the District of South Carolina.
Judge Currie was selected by an appellate court that oversees both her district and the Eastern District of Virginia—the jurisdiction in which both Comey and James were indicted.
JUST IN: Judge Cameron Currie, a Clinton appointee, will decide whether Lindsey Halligan is disqualified as interim U.S. attorney, following a motion brought by James Comey. https://t.co/V5G24T0BcM pic.twitter.com/yFLCSlgyaP
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) October 21, 2025
“It is appropriate to reassign such a disqualification motion outside the pertinent district because the judges of that district have a conflict of interest,” wrote Andrew C. McCarthy in National Review.
“Beyond presiding over various cases in which the government is a party—and which the district’s U.S. attorney supervises—the judges could also be called upon to decide whether an interim U.S. attorney may remain in office after the statutory 120-day term has expired,” he added.