Virginia Prosecutor Seeks to Remove Title Following Dismissal
ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Lindsey Harrigan, Virginia’s leading federal prosecutor, filed a motion in court on Tuesday to renounce her title as “U.S. Attorney.” This request comes after a lower court dismissed her case, citing her improper appointment—a ruling that called out a judge for “gross abuse of power.”
Harrigan took aim at U.S. District Judge David J. Novak regarding two unrelated cases distinct from the previously dismissed prosecutions against former FBI Director James Comey and former New York Attorney General Letitia James. Those cases are under appeal in the Federal Circuit.
In a ruling on January 6, Judge Novak, appointed by President Trump in 2019, informed Harrigan that the continued use of the title “U.S. Attorney” could not override a “binding” order from District Judge Cameron Curry, who dismissed the indictments involving Comey and James.
Novak sought clarification on whether using the title might be considered a false or misleading statement.
In response, Harrigan, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche contended in court documents that the judge disregarded Supreme Court precedents and committed numerous “legal errors.” They suggested that these actions warranted stripping Harrigan of her title while also criticizing Novak for several “factual errors” in his recent filings.
In their January 13 filing, they expressed concern that the court’s implied threat to use attorney discipline to control the executive branch undermines the separation of powers, branding it a significant abuse of authority.
“Contrary to the court’s indication, there’s nothing in the removal orders of Mr. Comey and Mr. James that prevents Mr. Harrigan from executing his responsibilities as a federal prosecutor,” they stated.
The trio also indicated that former special counsel Jack Smith was not stripped of his title when the charges against Trump were dismissed, even in cases involving serious criminal allegations.
In the cocaine distribution case, they underscored that Novak himself had made false assertions, claiming Harrigan ignored Curry’s prior rulings, when in fact the indictment occurred just six days before that order was issued.
On November 24, Curry declared that Harrigan held “no legal authority” for prosecuting Trump’s long-time rival because her appointment lacked Senate confirmation.
Although the November order didn’t specify Harrigan’s removal, the Justice Department appealed it.
In a more recent ruling, Novak emphasized that because “no injunction has been issued in connection with that appeal,” Curry’s decision stays binding in this district and must be adhered to.
The Justice Department official asserted that Harrigan had not “misrepresented” anything and deemed it erroneous for the court to imply that changes to signature blocks were warranted, particularly based on an inaccurate timeline.
He continued by stating, “The court lacks authority to remove the title of attorney from her signature line unilaterally,” quoting Novak’s prior comments.
Additionally, Harrigan, Bondi, and Blanche requested the judge to retract the order.
Harrigan was appointed by Trump following her predecessor’s failure to obtain indictments against Comey and James last autumn.
