Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The Justice Department’s effort to refile criminal charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James collapsed again Thursday, when a federal grand jury declined to return an indictment less than two weeks after the original case was thrown out, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The failure poses yet another setback for prosecutors pursuing cases that President Donald Trump has publicly championed against some of his most prominent political adversaries. James, who brought the civil fraud lawsuit that resulted in a massive judgment against Trump, has denied wrongdoing and described the case as baseless retaliation.
James was previously indicted on charges of bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution — charges obtained in a process that fell apart almost immediately. That indictment was voided Nov. 24 after a federal judge ruled that Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s former personal attorney whom he installed as acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, was unlawfully appointed and lacked authority to prosecute the case.
A failed restart
After the court’s stunning rebuke, the Justice Department initially signaled an appeal but instead opted to seek a clean indictment before a newly convened grand jury in Norfolk, Virginia. Different prosecutors handled the presentation this time.
But Thursday’s outcome mirrored the first collapse. A separate person familiar with the matter cautioned that the failure to secure a charge “should be no premature celebration,” noting that prosecutors retain the ability to bring the case back to a grand jury.
The Justice Department declined to comment, citing rules that prohibit discussing grand jury proceedings.
Political pressure and an unorthodox appointment
The extraordinary sequence of events has intensified scrutiny on Trump’s intervention in federal prosecutions. Federal Judge Cameron Currie’s ruling last month tossed not only the James case but a criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey, who had been charged with making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional investigation.
Both cases had been driven by Halligan — a Trump ally with no prior prosecutorial experience — whose appointment came on Sept. 20, one day after Trump ousted his original nominee for the post, Erik Siebert, for resisting pressure to pursue charges against Comey and James.
Trump also privately and publicly pressed Attorney General Pam Bondi to accelerate the prosecutions. In a social media post that aides later said was intended as a private message to Bondi, Trump complained that critics saw “nothing is being done” about Comey, Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California and “Leticia,” insisting that “they’re all guilty as hell.”
“We can’t delay any longer,” Trump wrote, urging Bondi to move more aggressively while praising Halligan as “a really good lawyer.”
Next steps unclear
The back-to-back failures leave the Justice Department with few clear options. Prosecutors could again try to present evidence to a third grand jury, but the twin collapses — first on legal authority, then on the merits — raise questions about whether the cases can survive independent review absent political pressure from the White House.
Both cases also remain flashpoints in a broader debate over the Trump administration’s use of federal law enforcement, which critics say has veered into targeted prosecution of political opponents. Supporters argue the cases reflect long-overdue accountability.
For now, the spotlight shifts back to the Justice Department’s internal deliberations — and whether it will push forward, stand down, or escalate legal and political tensions in pursuing charges that federal jurors have so far refused to endorse.
