Federal judges keep telling the Justice Department that President Trump's hand-picked U.S. attorneys are serving illegally. NPR has the story here.
Professor Alberto Bernabe - The University of Illinois-Chicago School of Law
Thursday, March 12, 2026
Saturday, January 24, 2026
Judge orders Lindsey Halligan to stop 'masquerading' as US attorney
A few days ago I posted that a judge issued an order to show cause why Lindsey Halligan's conduct in continuing to refer to herself as "US Attorney" did not constitute a violation of rule 8.4 regarding dishonesty, among others. See here and here.
A few days later, after a hearing, the judge has issued an order. In it, the judge ordered the removal of the words “United States Attorney” from government filings in a case Halligan was involved in and prevented her from representing herself as the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia unless appointed or confirmed by the Senate. The judge also stated: “This charade of Ms. Halligan masquerading as the United States Attorney for this District in direct defiance of binding court orders must come to an end,” Courthouse News Service has the story and a link to the order, here.
See also,
Brutal, Humiliating Benchslap Puts An End To Lindsey Halligan Experiment. Above the Law.
Judge posts job listing for prosecutor role Halligan claims to hold. The Hill
Lindsey Halligan, Trump's former personal attorney, exits federal prosecutor post. NPR
Sunday, January 18, 2026
Updates on the stories regarding Trump's illegally appointed prosecutors
Friday, January 9, 2026
Two Trump appointed attorneys disqualified (one for claiming to hold office she does not; another after the court found he did not have a right to hold the office)
Back in November of 2025, a federal District Judge found that Lindsey Halligan's appointment as interim US Attorney was unlawful, and that, therefore, she had no authority to hold the office she claimed to hold at the time. As you probably remember, this is the insurance lawyer with no prosecutorial experience that the Trump administration appointed, among other things, to bring charges against James Comey.
Although the government appealed the judge's opinion and order, no court has issued a stay which means the order remains in place.
For that reason, earlier this week, another federal judge was surprised to see that Ms. Halligan has continued to appear before his court still claiming to be a US Attorney, and promptly ordered her to explain herself and to explain why her conduct does not constitute a false or misleading statement in violation of professional conduct rules.
The Hill and Above the Law have the full story (and the judge's order).
Meanwhile, in New York, another federal judge has disqualified the top federal prosecutor in upstate New York and blocked subpoenas his office issued to state Attorney General Letitia James finding that the lawyer's service as acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York “was and is unlawful” because the Justice Department maneuvered to keep him in the role after judges declined to extend his tenure, in violation of statutory procedure.
Again, The Hill and Above the Law have the story.
Wednesday, July 23, 2025
More lawyers quit from Department of Justice
“Nearly two-thirds of the U.S. Justice Department’s unit responsible for defending key Trump administration policies in court, have left their positions since President Donald Trump’s November election or announced plans to leave, according to a new list. Read the full story here.
h/t Renee Knake Jefferson's Legal Ethics Roundup.
Monday, July 21, 2025
DOJ's Ex-Ethics Lawyer Speaks Out After Being Fired by Pam Bondi
DOJ's Ex-Ethics Lawyer Speaks Out After Being Fired by Pam Bondi. Read the story here.
h/t Renee Knake Jefferson's Legal Ethics Roundup.
Sunday, July 20, 2025
More on Pam Bondi
Tuesday, July 15, 2025
Attorney General Pam Bondi fires top Justice Department ethics official
Given her track record, it should not surprise anyone that Attorney General Pam Bondi just fired one of the top career officials tasked with advising her and other senior Justice Department officials of their ethical obligations. Go here for more on the story.
Thursday, July 25, 2024
Federal prosecutor accused of withholding evidence in Trump protest cases
The Washington D.C. Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) has accused a former federal prosecutor who oversaw more than 200 cases related to protests of former President Trump’s 2017 inauguration of withholding evidence and of attempting to edit or obscure video evidence used against the defendants that otherwise could have been used to clear them of criminal charges. The Hill has more on the case here.
Saturday, July 13, 2024
Brady violation allegation leads to dismissal in case against Alec Baldwin
As reported in The Guardian (here), "Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial came to a dramatic end on Friday, after a New Mexico judge dismissed the case against the actor and found that the state had improperly withheld evidence related to how live rounds of ammunition ended up on the film set where the cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was fatally shot. Just days after courtroom proceedings had begun, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer ruled in favor of the defense and agreed that the charges against Baldwin should be dropped, finding that the state had concealed evidence that would have been favorable to the actor. The dismissal, made with prejudice, puts an end to the involuntary manslaughter case against Baldwin."
Law & Crime has more on the story here. According to this account, the motions hearing "eventually spiraled into something like a Russian nesting doll of discovery violations" and near the end of the hearing it was revealed that the "first chair" prosecutor — the one who gave the prosecution’s opening statement during the trial — had resigned.
Now the question is whether the prosecutor(s) will have to face discipline for their conduct. I guess we will have to wait and see.
MSNBC has more on the story here.
Sunday, January 28, 2024
Articles on why the allegations against Fani Willis are irrelevant to the criminal case
If you have been watching the news about the case against former president Trump in Georgia, you know that the defendant has argued the case should be dropped or that the prosecutor should be disqualified because of certain alleged inappropriate conduct.
The conduct in question should be taken seriously but it is irrelevant to the case in question.
Here are two articles that explain why:
Why Fani Willis Is Not Disqualified Under Georgia Law, in Just Security, by Norman L. Eisen, Joyce Vance and Richard Painter
Defendants in the Georgia election case have no reason to complain — even if the Fani Willis allegations are true, in CNN, by Bruce Green
Friday, December 22, 2023
Recent study in Ohio finds nearly 100 prosecutors who were found to have violated their duties, but none were sanctioned
NPR has published a long, disturbing article, titled "Ohio prosecutors broke rules to win convictions and got away with it" (see here) detailing the results of a study that found that state courts determined that about 100 prosecutors across Ohio had violated standards meant to preserve a defendant's civil rights in criminal trials and yet the state Supreme Court has not imposed sanctions on any of them. The study also found, among other things, that (1) most misconduct resulted from failing to disclose evidence and making inappropriate comments in closing arguments, (2) in nearly 80% of the cases, the misconduct was ruled not egregious enough to warrant a reversal, (3) none of the prosecutors involved in repeated improper-conduct cases was sanctioned by the Ohio Supreme Court and (4) all of the prosecutors found to have repeatedly acted improperly have continued to practice as attorneys, with some moving into more powerful positions, including two who became judges tasked with ensuring fair trials.
You should read the full article here.
Saturday, October 7, 2023
Courts in two separate cases in Louisiana deny motions to dismiss in cases against prosecutors for wrongful convictions
A federal judge recently denied the New Orleans District Attorney’s motion to dismiss a wrongful conviction claim by a man who spent 26 years in prison for murder based on the acknowledged unconstitutional suppression of favorable evidence by prosecutors under a former D.A. You can read the ruling here.
Meanwhile, in another case, a federal court declined to dismiss a former criminal defendant’s misconduct claims against a prosecutor after the man was freed from 44 years spent in prison for two rapes he did not commit. The prosecutor allegedly fabricated a police report to defeat the former prisoner’s alibi, behavior that would be excepted from prosecutorial immunity. You can read the ruling here.
Tuesday, July 25, 2023
Oklahoma court: past sexual relationship between judge and prosecutor entitles criminal defendant to new trial; should more cases be reversed?
An Oklahoma court recently held that the fact that a judge and a prosecutor were involved in a sexual relationship during the beginning stages of a murder trial entitles the defendant to new trial. The ABA Journal has the story here.
You can read the court's opinion here.If the relationship had been ongoing during the trial, this result would not be surprising, of course. In this case, the judge and prosecutor were in a relationship during the initial stages of the case only. The trial itself happened two or three years later.
One interesting question is whether the judge and the prosecutor should be subject to discipline for concealing the relationship while it was ongoing. The judge resigned his judgeship in spring 2021—after the prosecutor and two other lawyers accused him of sexual misconduct.
The judge acknowledged sexual relationships with two prosecutors, but he said they were consensual. A special prosecutor declined to bring charges in connection with the allegations.
Now I wonder if all the criminal cases tried by those prosecutors and presided by the judge should be looked into. If I were a criminal defense lawyer, I would look to see if I had represented any defendants during the years that they had ongoing relationships.
Monday, December 6, 2021
NY Times editorial criticizes lack of accountability for prosecutorial misconduct
About three weeks ago I reported that the organization "Accountability New York" filed a lawsuit in federal court in Manhattan arguing that the basis for the city’s pushback against the organization's work to hold prosecutors accountable for misconduct was unconstitutional. See here.
The issue has not gone unnoticed. Two days ago, the New York Times published an editorial critical of the City's position and of the lack of accountability for prosecutorial misconduct in general. It also suggests that the Justice Department’s office of professional responsibility needs an overhaul. You can read the article here. It is called "How Can You Destroy a Person’s Life and Only Get a Slap on the Wrist?"
Sunday, November 14, 2021
NY City reacts against law professors who filed complaints against prosecutors; law professors respond by filing lawsuit
Last May I wrote about a new organization in New York called "Accountability New York" created by lawyers and law professors to pursue complaints against prosecutors for misconduct. The organization started its work by filing 21 complaints to New York’s court-appointed grievance committees tasked with investigating attorney wrongdoing. Go here to read that original post.
You would think that having a group of lawyers seeking accountability prosecutorial misconduct would be a good thing; but not everyone agrees.
When the law professors of Accountability New York filed the grievances against the prosecutors they published everything online. But, because in New York disciplinary issues are supposed to be secret until (and if) until discipline is recommended, as reported by the New York Times, “the blowback from New York City was swift.”
In a letter sent directly to the grievance committee responsible for disciplining lawyers, a lawyer for the city accused the professors of politicizing the process and of violating the law by making the grievances public.
Accountability New York responded, though, and earlier this month, they filed a lawsuit in federal court in Manhattan in which they argue that the city’s pushback against the professors included the threat of further action if they continued to file grievances. The lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief. Here is a copy of the complaint.
The New York Times’ article quotes a spokesman for the city’s law department who claims that while prosecutors who committed misconduct should be held accountable, the professors’ attempted use of the grievance process was contrary to the law.
The lawsuit asks the court to declare unconstitutional the law that forces disciplinary proceedings to be secret as a violation of the First Amendment. The suit claims that the law is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to the law professors, whose complaints relied on allegations in judicial decisions and the public record.
The ABA Journal has more on the story here. The Queens Daily Eagle also has more here.
Wednesday, September 8, 2021
Recently exonerated man sues prosecutor
A recently exonerated man who spent 23 years in prison has filed a complaint against a longtime Mississippi district attorney alleging various violations of the U.S. and Mississippi state constitutions. The plaintiff was tried six times for the 1996 murders of four people. The defendant prosecuted all six trials, none of which resulted in a legally valid conviction. Four of those murder trials resulted in convictions and death sentences but all convictions were vacated due to prosecutorial misconduct. One of the opinions reversing one of those convictions was written by now Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh who wrote that “The state’s relentless, determined effort to rid the jury of black individuals strongly suggests that the state wanted to try Flowers before a jury with as few black jurors as possible, and ideally before an all-white jury.”
The background story is very compelling but the case will be an uphill battle. I expect that the prosecutor will argue qualified immunity and will cite Supreme Court precedent which makes it very difficult if not almost impossible for exonerated plaintiffs to win claims against former prosecutors. For this reason, cases like this often settle out of court, which provides some level of compensation.
For more information on the case go to Law&Crime, NPR, and Courthouse News Service.
Sunday, May 23, 2021
State Accuses Attorneys of Filing ‘Entirely Meritless’ Court Documents to ‘Harass and Discredit’ Prosecutors, Inject ‘a False Narrative in the Public Domain’
Defense attorneys for former Minneapolis police officer Tou Thao recently filed a motion arguing that the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s report into the death of George Floyd was “coerced” by outside influencers. The reply by the state affirms that “This is yet another bad-faith attempt by Defendant Thao to debase the State, disqualify members of the prosecution team, and divert attention from his role in the death of George Floyd..."
Law & Crime has details on the story here.
Friday, May 21, 2021
New organization in New York (called "Accountability NY") Is A Coalition Of Law Professors And Public-Interest Groups Seeking Professional Consequences For Prosecutorial Misconduct
Saturday, February 27, 2021
Recently released documents in New York show communications among prosecutors in case of possible misconduct
NPR is reporting that "[n]ewly disclosed documents from inside the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan capture a sense of panic and dread among prosecutors and their supervisors as one of their cases collapsed last year amid allegations of government misconduct." Go here for the full story.