Halligan
(Photo
by
Al
Drago/Getty
Images)
Lindsey
Halligan
has
finally
done
the
one
thing
the
Department
of
Justice
steadfastly
refused
to
do
for
months:
acknowledge
reality.
Following
an
extended
farce
of
legally
illiterate
cosplay
as
the
“United
States
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia,”
Halligan
had
to
hang
up
her
wings
and
tutu
as
Judge
David
Novak
declared
that
playtime
was
over.
In
an
18-page
benchslapping,
Judge
Novak
formally
barred
Halligan
from
continuing
to
call
herself
a
U.S.
Attorney
in
filings
until
she
either
gets
confirmed
by
the
Senate
or
appointed
by
the
district
judges
under
28
U.S.C.
§
546(d).
Since
neither
option
had
much
chance,
Pam
Bondi
announced
that
Halligan
would
be
leaving
her
not-really-her-job.
She
joins
Alina
Habba
—
another
lawyer
with
more
cable
news
presence
than
criminal
prosecutorial
know-how
—
in
having
to
sheepishly
depart
a
U.S.
Attorney
role
she
held
illegally.
The
opinion
marks
a
ignominious
end
for
the
insurance
lawyer
without
any
criminal
law
background,
whose
only
qualification
for
the
job
was
a
willingness
to
pursue
federal
criminal
cases
based
on
Donald
Trump’s
fever
dreams.
When
attorneys
with
experience
and
principles
refused
to
launch
phony
prosecutions
to
harass
Trump’s
enemies,
the
president
published
what
was
almost
certainly
meant
as
a
DM
to
Attorney
General
Pam
Bondi
complaining
that
no
one
had
pursued
his
perceived
rivals
and
flagging
Halligan
as
the
sort
of
lawyer
who
could
get
in
there
and
bring
cases
against
former
FBI
Director
James
Comey
and
current
NY
Attorney
General
Letitia
James.
And
Halligan
proved
the
president
right
to
the
extent
the
sort
of
lawyer
willing
to
sign
onto
those
cases
required
one
with
no
clue
what
she
was
doing
and
a
degree
from
the
Dunning-Kruger
School
of
Law.
She
promptly
wasted
taxpayer
dollars
on
two
cases
swiftly
laughed
out
of
court.
While
neither
case
had
much
going
for
it
—
the
James
case
kept
getting
rejected
by
grand
jurors
and
the
Comey
indictment
wasn’t
even
signed
by
a
grand
jury
—
the
biggest
problem
was
Halligan’s
own
illegal
appointment.
Those
decisions
were
made
by
Judge
Cameron
McGowan
Currie
of
the
District
of
South
Carolina,
sitting
by
designation
by
order
of
Fourth
Circuit
Chief
Judge
Albert
Diaz
to
conclusively
resolve
the
matter
of
Halligan’s
appointment
without
requiring
the
judges
of
the
Eastern
District
—
who
might
be
charged
with
finding
her
replacement
—
to
decide
the
issue.
Spoiler:
This
will
be
relevant.
But
despite
Judge
Currie’s
order,
Halligan
stuck
around
anyway,
continuing
to
identify
herself
as
the
head
of
the
office,
until
Judge
Novak
penned
what
can
best
be
described
as
an
“Order
To
Explain
What
The
Hell,
Lady?”
asking
her
to
explain
why
the
court
kept
seeing
her
name
on
documents
as
though
nothing
had
happened.
The
DOJ’s
response
wasn’t
so
much
legal
advocacy
as
a
Newsmax
chyron
with
footnotes.
It
marked
the
natural
and
logical
endpoint
of
a
strategy
forged
by
a
DOJ
brain
trust
that
believes
“being
loud
on
TV”
counts
as
a
litigation
strategy.
Ms.
Halligan’s
response,
in
which
she
was
joined
by
both
the
Attorney
General
and
the
Deputy
Attorney
General,
contains
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.
Judge
Novak
is
a
Trump-appointee.
It’s
a
reminder
that
while
there
are
some
in-over-their-head
Trump-nominated
district
judges
and
a
bevy
of
Republican
Circuit
Court
judges
willing
to
light
fire
to
their
dignity
to
stay
in
Trump’s
good
graces,
the
federal
trial
courts
have,
more
often
than
not,
put
aside
partisanship
to
honor
the
rule
of
law.
Bondi,
Blanche,
and
Halligan
—
that
three-headed
dragon
meme
if
all
three
heads
sported
googly
eyes
—
decided
to
tell
Judge
Novak
that
the
court
ruling
Halligan’s
appointment
illegal
in
the
Comey
and
James
cases
didn’t
apply
to
any
other
cases
and
every
criminal
defendant
would
need
to
relitigate
the
issue
from
scratch.
Judge
Novak
declined
the
invitation
to
turn
validity
of
every
prosecution
in
the
district
into
legal
whack-a-mole.
Rather
stunningly,
Ms.
Halligan
fails
to
even
mention
Chief
Judge
Diaz’s
Order,
let
alone
discuss
its
impact
here.
In
short,
Ms.
Halligan
has
not
only
ignored
Judge
Currie’s
rulings,
she
has
also
turned
a
blind
eye
to
an
Order
from
the
Chief
Judge
of
the
Fourth
Circuit.
The
Court
finds
it
inconceivable
that
the
Department
of
Justice,
which
holds
a
duty
to
faithfully
execute
the
laws
of
the
United
States
—
even
those
with
which
it
may
have
disagreement
—
would
repeatedly
ignore
court
orders,
while
simultaneously
prosecuting
citizens
for
breaking
the
law.
Is
it
stunning,
though?
For
an
added
injection
of
comedy:
even
if
Halligan’s
appointment
had
been
valid,
it
would
have
expired
on
January
20,
2026,
the
day
Judge
Novak
issued
this
order.
So
the
120-day
clock
ran
out…
again!
This
whole
exercise
in
defiance
was
for
nothing.
The
DOJ’s
attempt
to
bootstrap
this
to
the
Supreme
Court’s
attack
on
nationwide
injunctions,
a
dunderheaded
argument
from
the
start,
also
earned
an
exasperated
eye
roll
from
Judge
Novak:
The
Court’s
concerns
about
Ms.
Halligan’s
representation
do
not
implicate
the
specific
concerns
that
the
CASA
Court
set
out
to
address
and,
more
importantly,
do
not
reach
beyond
this
Court,
let
alone
across
the
Nation.
Rather,
the
Court
simply
applies
the
legal
precedent
promulgated
by
Judge
Currie’s
Order,
which
disposed
of
the
validity
of
Ms.
Halligan’s
appointment
for
all
matters
in
which
her
unlawful
appointment
becomes
an
issue
in
this
District,
to
include
the
specific
indictment
in
the
case
at
hand.
“Simply
flouting
a
judicial
order
because
of
a
disagreement
of
‘interpretation’
and
acting
like
that
order
does
not
exist
is
simply
not
an
option,”
Judge
Novak
writes.
But
the
most
surgically
cruel
jab
comes
at
the
end,
as
Judge
Novak
declines
to
refer
Halligan
to
disciplinary
authorities:
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.
You’re
not
malicious,
just
stupid
is
a
rough
passage
to
have
published
in
the
annals
of
American
law.
But
it’s
a
frustrating
conclusion
to
reach.
Virginia
authorities
have
already
indicated
that
they
won’t
bother
enforcing
professional
ethics
without
an
engraved
invitation
from
a
judge…
and
maybe
not
even
then.
Does
anyone
have
jurisdiction
over
accountability
anymore?
Or
is
this
just
an
elaborate
game
of
hot
potato
until
everyone
gives
up?
Leniency
is
a
virtue,
but
at
a
certain
point
someone
has
to
put
their
foot
down,
because
—
to
borrow
from
Judge
Novak
himself
—
simply
flouting
a
judicial
order
because
of
a
disagreement
will
continue
to
be
the
DOJ’s
plan
of
action
as
long
as
everyone
keeps
treating
these
lawyers
like
misguided
students
instead
of
willful
bad
actors.
Halligan
may
be
out,
but
whoever
comes
next
will
push
even
further,
knowing
the
worst
that
happens
is
a
strongly
worded
opinion
that
declines
to
follow
through.
But
firewalls
only
work
if
breaching
them
carries
an
actual
cost.
Earlier:
Lindsey
Halligan
Says
Her
‘I’m
An
Illegal
Appointment’
T-Shirt
Has
People
Asking
A
Lot
Of
Questions
Already
Answered
By
Her
Shirt
Judge
Demands
Fake
U.S.
Attorney
Explain
Why
She’s
Still
Pretending
To
Be
U.S.
Attorney
Virginia
State
Bar
Whistles
Past
Lindsey
Halligan
Ethics
Complaint
Claiming
It’s
Not
Their
Job
Alina
Habba
Quits
Job
She
Never
Legally
Held
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.