Judge Rules DOJ Illegally Fired Prosecutor Maurene Comey
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled on Monday, October 26, 2026, that the Trump administration illegally fired Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey in July 2025.[1]
Furman said the dismissal violated the constitutional separation of powers, the Administrative Procedure Act, and Comey's Fifth Amendment due process and statutory rights.[1] He ordered retroactive reinstatement and back pay from the July 2025 firing date through December 20, 2025, to "make her whole" and to avoid adverse employment consequences.[1] Furman also rejected the Justice Department's claim that presidents have "conclusive and preclusive" removal power over federal prosecutors.[1]
The firing occurred in July 2025 when the Trump Justice Department removed Comey from her post as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. Comey had consistently received top performance reviews and worked on high-profile cases before her removal, and she is the daughter of former FBI director James Comey.[2]
The court left Comey's First Amendment claim open for further briefing.[1] Furman said he is inclined to dismiss it as largely moot because she now works in private practice and no longer seeks present-tense reinstatement.[1] The Justice Department did not immediately comment, and Comey's lawyers hailed the ruling as a win for civil servants and the rule of law.[2]
Show source details & analysis (2 sources)
📌 Key Facts
- On Monday, October 26, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled that the Trump administration illegally fired Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey in July 2025.
- Furman held that the firing violated the constitutional separation of powers, the Administrative Procedure Act, and Comey's Fifth Amendment due process and statutory rights.
- He rejected the administration's argument that federal prosecutors fall entirely within the president's 'conclusive and preclusive' removal power, saying that view 'flies in the face of nearly two centuries' of Supreme Court precedent.
- Furman ordered retroactive reinstatement and back pay from the July 2025 firing date through December 20, 2025, to 'make her whole' and avoid adverse employment consequences.
- The court left Comey's First Amendment claim open for further briefing but indicated it is inclined to dismiss it as largely moot because she is now in private practice and no longer seeks present‑tense reinstatement.
- The ruling notes that Comey consistently received top performance reviews and worked on some of the nation's highest‑profile cases before her removal.
- The Justice Department did not immediately comment on the ruling, and Comey's lawyers publicly hailed the decision as a win for civil servants and the rule of law.
📰 Source Timeline (2)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
- On Monday, October 26, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled that the Trump administration illegally fired Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey in July 2025.
- Furman held that the firing violated the constitutional separation of powers, the Administrative Procedure Act, and Comey's Fifth Amendment due process and statutory rights.
- The judge rejected the administration's argument that federal prosecutors fall entirely within the president's "conclusive and preclusive" removal power and said that view "flies in the face of nearly two centuries" of Supreme Court precedent.
- Furman ordered retroactive reinstatement and back pay from the July 2025 firing date through December 20, 2025, to "make her whole" and avoid adverse employment consequences.
- The court left Comey's First Amendment claim open for further briefing, indicating Furman is inclined to dismiss it as largely moot because she is now in private practice and no longer seeks present-tense reinstatement.
- The ruling notes that Comey consistently received top performance reviews and worked on some of the nation's highest-profile cases before her removal.
- The article reports that the Justice Department did not immediately comment on the ruling and that Comey's lawyers publicly hailed the decision as a win for civil servants and the rule of law.