President Donald Trump currently has only two Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys in office, yet his administration has aggressively relied on interim and unconfirmed prosecutors to advance criminal cases against political adversaries, raising concerns among legal experts about the independence of the Justice Department.
In several key districts, newly installed or temporary U.S. attorneys with little or no prosecutorial experience have taken on politically sensitive cases involving figures Trump has publicly criticized.
In Virginia’s Eastern District, Lindsey Halligan — a former personal lawyer to Trump who had never prosecuted a criminal case, secured an indictment last week against former FBI Director James Comey. The indictment came just three days after Trump removed an experienced prosecutor and installed Halligan on an interim basis.
In New York’s Northern District, John Sarcone, also a first-time prosecutor, is overseeing a criminal investigation into New York Attorney General Letitia James, another frequent target of Trump’s attacks.
Sarcone remains in the post indefinitely without Senate confirmation after Trump used a procedural maneuver to retain him, even after district judges declined to formally appoint him to the role.
In New Jersey, Alina Habba another former Trump personal attorney with no prior prosecutorial experience is leading a federal prosecution against a Democratic member of Congress who was conducting an oversight visit at an immigration detention center.
Habba is also serving indefinitely without Senate confirmation, though her authority to hold the position is being challenged in court.
Nationwide, most of Trump’s nominees for U.S. attorney positions have not been confirmed by the Senate. Some have faced resistance due to concerns over limited experience or prior politicized conduct, while others appear confirmable but have been blocked by Senate Democrats.
As a result, the majority of the country’s 93 U.S. attorney offices are currently led by interim officials. Legal scholars and former prosecutors say several of those interim leaders appear to have shown greater deference to Trump’s political priorities than has traditionally been the case.
Historically, U.S. attorneys have guarded their offices’ independence not only from the White House but also from Justice Department headquarters, regardless of which party controlled the presidency. That tradition, critics say, has eroded during the first eight months of Trump’s second term.
“It’s changing the whole culture of the office,” said Mimi Rocah, a former federal prosecutor and former Westchester County district attorney.
“Everything every prosecutor was taught — Republican or Democrat from day one was: ‘Do the right thing in the right way for the right reason,’” said Rocah, now an adjunct professor at Fordham Law School. “What’s changed is that it’s no longer about doing the right thing. It’s about doing what President Trump wants, whether it’s right or wrong.”
Rocah cited the Comey indictment as a prominent example, along with the Justice Department’s directive to dismiss a federal corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, despite objections from the top prosecutor handling the matter.
The Senate confirmation process is intended to vet candidates for U.S. attorney positions by examining their legal experience, ethics, and financial backgrounds. But legal analysts say Trump has largely bypassed that system either intentionally or due to political gridlock, installing preferred candidates on short notice and sometimes cycling through multiple leaders in the same office within days.
“They’re in a hurry,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond. “They want to get it done, and they don’t want to bother with the niceties of the process, even though it has worked in the past including during Trump’s first term.”
The Eastern District of Virginia illustrates the instability. After U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert resigned on a Friday, reportedly amid pressure to pursue charges against Trump critics — Attorney General Pam Bondi named conservative lawyer Mary “Maggie” Cleary as interim U.S. attorney. By Monday, Cleary had been replaced by Halligan, marking the district’s third leader in four days.
That pattern could soon change. Senate Republicans earlier this month altered chamber rules to allow votes on groups of nominees simultaneously, a move known as the “nuclear option.” The change is expected to clear the way for confirmation votes on more than a dozen U.S. attorney nominees.
If confirmed, those nominees would expand the administration’s footprint beyond the two Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys currently in office: Jeanine Pirro in Washington, D.C., and Jason Reding Quiñones in Florida’s Southern District.
By comparison, President Joe Biden had 31 U.S. attorney nominees confirmed in his first calendar year, while President Barack Obama had 30. Trump exceeded both during his first term, with 46 confirmations in his first year, according to Senate Judiciary Committee data.
Former U.S. attorney Harry Litman said Senate confirmation provides stability and authority that interim appointments lack.
“In normal times, you want the department to be operating in a rational, methodical way,” Litman said. “A confirmed U.S. attorney has credibility within the office, with the courts, and with the broader community.”
The administration’s reliance on temporary appointments has triggered legal challenges in several districts, potentially jeopardizing ongoing prosecutions.
In New Jersey, a defendant facing drug and firearms charges argued that the administration’s appointment process was unconstitutional, challenging Habba’s authority to prosecute the case. A federal judge disqualified Habba in August, though the ruling has been stayed pending appeal.
Federal public defenders in California and Nevada have raised similar challenges, questioning the authority of acting U.S. attorneys Bill Essayli in Los Angeles and Sigal Chattah in Las Vegas.
Those cases remain unresolved, with filings citing the Habba ruling and unresolved questions surrounding prosecutors in New Mexico and New York.
In Delaware, Chief Judge Colm Connolly issued a preemptive order last week asserting district judges’ authority to appoint a U.S. attorney of their choosing once the Trump administration’s interim appointee reaches the end of a 120-day term.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche criticized the move in a post on X, urging Connolly to “revisit our Constitution,” arguing that appointments of U.S. attorneys are “first and foremost the duty of the President, not the courts.”
Political obstacles remain as well. In New York, Trump nominated Jay Clayton to serve as Manhattan’s U.S. attorney. Clayton previously won Senate confirmation during Trump’s first term as chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission and is viewed as confirmable.
However, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced in April that he would block U.S. attorney nominees in New York, citing concerns that Trump intended to weaponize federal prosecutors against political opponents.
Trump subsequently appointed Clayton in an interim capacity, and district judges later voted to keep him in the role indefinitely pending Senate action.
More broadly, Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats, led by Sen. Dick Durbin, have slowed confirmations by requiring roll call votes rather than unanimous consent, a tactic Durbin has described as following the “Vance precedent,” referencing Vice President JD Vance’s earlier hold on Biden-era nominees.
Republicans have condemned the strategy. Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley accused Democrats of blanket obstruction, arguing that such tactics undermine the functioning of the Justice Department.
Tobias said the current situation risks long-term damage.
“We don’t need any more New Jerseys,” he said, referring to the legal turmoil surrounding Habba’s appointment. “That just shouldn’t happen to a district.”
This article was first published on Politico
