This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.
A federal judge has ordered Lindsey Halligan, a former prosecutor now disqualified from her role, to explain why she continues to refer to herself as a U.S. attorney after being formally ruled ineligible to hold the position.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that U.S. District Judge David J. Novak is examining whether Halligan made a false statement to the court by using the U.S. attorney title. Novak directed Halligan to submit an explanation within seven days, having been appointed to the Eastern District of Virginia by President Donald Trump during his first term.
Halligan previously served as a prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia but has since been found ineligible to continue in that role.
In his three-page announcement, Novak noted that Halligan “identified herself therein as the United States Attorney for this District” despite “a binding Court Order entered by Senior United States District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie on November 24, 2025” to disqualify her from the role.
Novak ordered Halligan to “further explain why her identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement.”
Currie, who was first appointed by then-President Bill Clinton, ruled in November that Halligan’s appointment was improper. Trump named Halligan to the position after then–U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert resigned.
Siebert stepped down following complaints from Trump that no indictments had been brought against his political opponents. Siebert had maintained that prosecutors lacked sufficient evidence to pursue charges against potential defendants, including former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan.
In late December, Halligan identified herself in court filings as “Lindsey Halligan, United States Attorney Eastern District of Virgina [sic], Florida Bar No. 109481 2100,” according to the signature block of the documents.
The misspelling drew swift criticism and mockery from legal journalists and commentators, while also prompting questions about whether Halligan was permitted to continue using the U.S. attorney title after a federal judge had formally disqualified her from the position.
Following Halligan’s disqualification in November, indictments she had issued against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) were dismissed.
Prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have since halted new filings in several pending investigations, citing the leadership vacancy created by Halligan’s removal from the post.
Last month, another Clinton-appointed judge ordered the FBI to destroy emails central to the obstruction and false statements case against Comey, a decision that legal experts warn could cripple prosecutors’ ability to pursue a new indictment and set off a constitutional showdown over separation of powers.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who sits on the D.C. District Court, issued the surprise order on December 13, directing the FBI to permanently delete all data seized from Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman—Comey’s longtime friend and former government contractor—by 4 p.m. Monday.
The emails include key exchanges between Richman and Comey that prosecutors allege show Comey authorized leaks and false testimony about his role in Operation Crossfire Hurricane.
The ruling follows the September indictment of Comey on two counts—making false statements to Congress and obstruction of a congressional proceeding—related to his 2020 testimony about the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation.
Prosecutors allege Comey falsely denied using intermediaries to leak classified material to the press, and that he used Richman as an outside conduit for anti-Trump leaks while Richman held a government contract.
Six years ago, Judge James Boasberg—himself an Obama appointee—signed the warrant that allowed the FBI to seize Richman’s devices. But Kollar-Kotelly’s order, issued from a separate court and in a separate district, now directs the destruction of that same evidence.
“This ruling threatens the separation of powers essential to the Republic, and either the D.C. Circuit or Supreme Court must intervene immediately,” said Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project and a former Senate Judiciary Committee counsel.
