A federal judge in Manhattan has ruled that the Justice Department unlawfully removed career prosecutor Maurene Comey, rejecting the government’s argument that the President could dismiss her without observing the protections Congress created for federal employees.
US District Judge Jesse Furman held that Comey was an inferior officer rather than a principal officer exercising authority directly on the President’s behalf. That distinction mattered because Congress had authorised the Attorney General to remove assistant US attorneys while also placing the position within the civil-service framework. The department could not avoid that framework by treating the removal as an unreviewable exercise of presidential power, the court concluded.
The remedy is carefully bounded. Furman ordered Comey’s retroactive reinstatement and back pay from her July 2025 dismissal through December 20, 2025, when she began private-sector work. The amount of back pay, costs and any legal fees remain to be resolved. The ruling also declares that the removal violated statutory protections, due process and the constitutional separation of powers.
The court did not decide Comey’s First Amendment claim that she was dismissed because of her association with her father, former FBI Director James Comey. Furman directed her to explain by November 9 whether that claim should continue, and stayed discovery in the meantime. The opinion therefore resolves the core removal question but leaves part of the case open.
The Justice Department has said it disagrees and intends to appeal. Until an appellate court intervenes, the judgment stands as a substantial limit on the government’s ability to treat career prosecutors as politically removable officials. It also separates the legality of the dismissal from the disputed question of why Comey was selected for removal.
Read the official court opinion
