Justice Department again fails to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James, AP source says

Grand Jury Rejects Second Attempt to Indict New York Attorney General James

In a significant setback to the Justice Department’s efforts against prominent Trump critics, a Virginia grand jury has declined for the second time in a week to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James, dealing a substantial blow to the administration’s campaign against political opponents.

The repeated rejections represent an unusual rebuke of prosecutors’ attempts to resurrect a criminal case that President Donald Trump had publicly pressured officials to pursue. Legal experts suggest this may indicate growing public skepticism about what critics have characterized as politically motivated prosecutions.

The Justice Department sought an indictment Thursday from a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, after a separate grand jury in Norfolk refused to do so just last week. The back-to-back failures are particularly damaging for a department that has faced accusations of pursuing politically motivated cases against figures who have clashed with the president.

“This unprecedented rejection makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day,” said Abbe Lowell, James’ attorney, in a statement following the decision. “This case already has been a stain on this Department’s reputation and raises troubling questions about its integrity. Any further attempt to revive these discredited charges would be a mockery of our system of justice.”

The case against James originated from allegations related to a home purchase in 2020. Prosecutors claimed she signed a “second home rider” document promising to keep the property primarily for personal use for at least one year, but instead rented it out to a family of three. This allegedly allowed her to obtain favorable loan terms not typically available for investment properties.

James, a Democrat who has been a prominent Trump adversary, had previously filed a high-profile lawsuit against the former president alleging he built his business empire on misrepresentations about his wealth. That legal action resulted in a substantial judgment against Trump, though it was later overturned by a higher court. Both sides are currently appealing that decision.

The original indictments against both James and former FBI Director James Comey were dismissed in November by U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie. The judge ruled that Lindsey Halligan, the prosecutor who presented evidence to the grand jury, had been illegally appointed as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Halligan, a former Trump lawyer with no prior prosecutorial experience, was installed after Erik Siebert, a veteran prosecutor serving as interim U.S. attorney, resigned in September amid Trump administration pressure to file charges against both James and Comey. Trump had publicly stated he wanted Siebert “out.”

The Justice Department’s efforts to reinstate charges against Comey have faced additional hurdles. A federal judge temporarily barred prosecutors from accessing computer files belonging to Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor and Comey associate whom investigators consider central to their case against the former FBI director.

Prosecutors moved on Tuesday to challenge that order, arguing that Richman’s request for the return of his files was a “strategic tool to obstruct the investigation and potential prosecution.” They claimed the judge had exceeded her authority and impeded their ability to proceed with a case against Comey.

These setbacks come amid broader criticism of the administration’s approach to the Justice Department. Legal observers note that grand jury rejections are relatively rare, as these proceedings typically favor prosecutors who present evidence without defense counsel present. The dual rejections suggest jurors had significant concerns about the merits or motivation of the cases.

The Justice Department has not yet indicated whether it will attempt a third effort to secure an indictment against James. Officials familiar with the matter declined to comment on potential next steps in what has become an increasingly fraught legal pursuit.