Judge Orders Halligan Out As Virginia Top Prosecutor

In a dramatic turn that has rocked the Justice Department and sparked fierce debate in legal and political circles, Lindsey Halligan’s tenure as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia has come to an abrupt and contentious end. Halligan, a former White House aide and member of President Donald Trump’s legal team, was compelled to step down after a federal judge ruled her appointment unlawful and sharply rebuked her for continuing to use the prestigious title despite binding court orders to the contrary.

Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed Halligan’s departure late Tuesday, January 21, 2026, in a statement posted to social media. "During her 120-day tenure as Interim United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan served with the utmost distinction and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law," Bondi said, lamenting what she called a “significant loss for the Department of Justice and the communities she served.” According to Bondi, Halligan’s exit was precipitated by Senate Democrats “making it impossible” for her to continue past her 120-day appointment deadline, a charge that immediately drew attention to the partisan gridlock that has increasingly characterized the appointment of federal prosecutors.

The controversy began in earnest in November 2025, when U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie ruled that Halligan’s appointment violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and federal statutes. Currie’s ruling not only declared Halligan ineligible to serve as the district’s top federal prosecutor but also dismissed the high-profile indictments she had brought against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Both cases, which alleged that Comey and James had lied during congressional testimony, were thrown out as a direct result of Halligan’s improper appointment.

Despite the court’s clear decision, Halligan continued to identify herself as the U.S. attorney in official filings, prompting U.S. District Judge David Novak to issue an 18-page order on January 20, 2026, barring her from using the title in court. "Ms. Halligan's continued identification of herself as the United States Attorney for this District ignores a binding court order and may not continue," Novak wrote. He warned that any further misrepresentation would subject Halligan and her colleagues to disciplinary proceedings under the court’s local rules.

Judge Novak’s order was unequivocal in its condemnation of the Justice Department’s response, which he described as containing “a level of vitriol more appropriate for a cable news talk show and falls far beneath the level of advocacy expected from litigants in this Court, particularly the Department of Justice.” The department’s filing, signed by Halligan, Attorney General Bondi, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, accused Novak of a “gross abuse of power” and characterized his actions as an “inquisition” and “insult” to the executive branch. Yet Novak was unmoved, writing, “If the Court were to allow Ms. Halligan and the Department of Justice to pick and choose which orders that they will follow, the same would have to be true for other litigants and our system of justice would crumble.”

Halligan’s appointment had been contentious from the start. After President Trump’s previous nominee, Erik Siebert, declined to investigate Letitia James for alleged mortgage fraud, Halligan was tapped to take the helm in September 2025. Her 120-day interim appointment, allowed under federal statute, was set to expire on January 20, 2026. Normally, such appointments are extended by the district’s federal judges, but in Halligan’s case, the Senate—specifically Virginia’s Democratic senators—refused to advance her nomination for a permanent post. The so-called “blue slip” process, a Senate tradition allowing home-state senators to approve or block nominees, became a flashpoint, with Bondi accusing Democrats of weaponizing the procedure to stymie the administration’s picks.

“The circumstances that led to this outcome are deeply misguided,” Bondi insisted in her statement. “We are living in a time when a democratically elected President’s ability to staff key law enforcement positions faces serious obstacles. The Department of Justice will continue to seek review of decisions like this that hinder our ability to keep the American people safe.”

On the ground in Richmond, the fallout was swift. Chief District Judge M. Hannah Lauck, an Obama appointee, posted a job opening for the interim U.S. attorney position the same day Halligan’s departure was announced. Federal law states that in the absence of a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney, district judges are tasked with selecting a replacement. However, the White House retains the power to remove any court-appointed successor, setting the stage for continued tension between the executive branch and the judiciary.

Halligan’s lack of prosecutorial experience was also noted by Judge Novak, who wrote, “The Court recognizes that Ms. Halligan lacks the prosecutorial experience that has long been the norm for those nominated to the position of United States Attorney in this District. Consequently, and in light of her inexperience, the Court grants Ms. Halligan the benefit of the doubt and refrains from referring her for further investigation and disciplinary action regarding her misrepresentations to this Court at this time.”

The Justice Department, for its part, initially tried to defend Halligan’s continued use of the U.S. attorney title by arguing that Judge Currie’s November ruling applied only to the Comey and James cases. But Judge Novak flatly rejected that position, stating, “Those Orders, though currently on appeal, have not been overturned or stayed, and thus constitute the law of this District. Having been found by this Court to be unlawfully appointed, Ms. Halligan lacks lawful authority to represent herself as the United States Attorney before this Court.”

As the dust settles, the Eastern District of Virginia finds itself in search of new leadership, with the court actively seeking applicants to fill the vacancy. The episode has underscored the increasingly fraught nature of federal appointments in an era of deep political polarization, where even the routine staffing of key law enforcement roles can become a battleground for broader ideological and constitutional disputes.

For now, Lindsey Halligan’s brief and embattled tenure as interim U.S. attorney has ended, leaving behind a cautionary tale of legal boundaries, political maneuvering, and the enduring tension between branches of government. The next chapter for the Eastern District—and for Halligan herself—remains to be written, but the consequences of this episode are sure to echo in Washington and beyond for months to come.