A swift and unsettling pattern is emerging within the Justice Department. In just two weeks, a second U.S. attorney, appointed by federal judges, has been abruptly dismissed, igniting a fierce dispute over the fundamental power to control federal prosecutions.
The latest removal involves James Hundley, a seasoned lawyer selected by judges in the Eastern District of Virginia to replace Lindsey Halligan. Halligan’s appointment had already been challenged, with the court determining she was serving illegitimately, creating the vacancy Hundley was meant to fill.
The dismissal wasn’t delivered through official channels, but rather announced publicly by a top DOJ official on social media. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s message was stark: “EDVA judges do not pick our US Attorney. POTUS does. James Hundley, you’re fired!”
This action mirrors a similar situation in the Northern District of New York, where Donald Kinsella faced immediate termination after being chosen by judges to succeed another Trump appointee, John Sarcone, who was also deemed unqualified by the court.
Legal scholars are weighing in, clarifying the complex interplay between law and constitutional authority. While judges may have the power to initially appoint a lawyer to fill a vacancy, the ultimate authority to remove a U.S. attorney rests solely with the President, according to established precedent.
The White House appears to be reinforcing this position. Dan Scavino, head of the Presidential Personnel Office, bluntly informed Hundley to “Check your email James” immediately following Blanche’s public announcement, underscoring the swiftness and decisiveness of the action.
These dismissals are creating operational challenges within the Justice Department. With vacancies remaining unfilled due to Senate confirmation delays – particularly in states where the “blue slip” tradition allows home-state senators to effectively veto nominees – DOJ leadership is being forced to step in and personally sign off on court filings.
The situation is further complicated by previous disqualifications, such as that of Alina Habba, another Trump appointee. The DOJ initially appealed this decision, but the appeals court upheld the lower court’s ruling, and no further appeal to the Supreme Court has been filed.
In Habba’s district, three department officials have been assigned to cover the duties of the U.S. attorney, a temporary solution that highlights the growing strain on resources and the escalating tension between the executive and judicial branches over control of the nation’s legal system.
The unfolding events raise critical questions about the independence of the Justice Department and the limits of presidential power, signaling a potentially prolonged battle over the appointment and removal of federal prosecutors across the country.
