In a significant ruling on Monday, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court's decision disqualifying Alina Habba, a former personal lawyer to President Trump, from serving as the acting U.S. Attorney in New Jersey. The unanimous decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit counters the Trump administration's attempt to use a novel approach to place unconfirmed lawyers into temporary U.S. attorney positions across the nation.
The case emerged when three men facing criminal charges in New Jersey challenged the validity of Habba's appointment, arguing it was a violation of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA). They sought to have their indictments dismissed based on this premise. In August, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann ruled that Habba had been serving without lawful authority since her appointment in July as the head of the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey, declaring her disqualified from participating in ongoing legal cases.
The Justice Department appealed Judge Brann's decision to the 3rd Circuit, making it the first federal appeals court to address this controversial scheme for appointing U.S. attorneys. The court's ruling confirmed that Alina Habba was unlawfully occupying her position, marking a historic moment in which an appellate court asserted that President Trump could not override established statutory and constitutional processes to install individuals into these critical roles.
In a joint statement, lawyers Abbe Lowell, Gerry Krovatin, and Norm Eisen expressed their determination to challenge President Trump's unlawful appointments of purported U.S. attorneys wherever necessary. This reflects a growing concern over the administration's manipulation of the appointment process.
Thomas Mirigliano, representing one of the defendants, stated that the panel provided a clear and well-reasoned decision that acknowledges the significant power vested in U.S. attorneys. The ruling reinforces the limits established by Congress regarding who may occupy these positions, underscoring the importance of maintaining checks and balances within the federal government.
Neither Alina Habba nor the Justice Department responded immediately to requests for comment following the ruling.
Habba had been appointed as the interim U.S. attorney in New Jersey earlier this year for a period of 120 days, unless extended by the U.S. district court or confirmed by the Senate. However, her chances for Senate approval were slim due to opposition from New Jersey's Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim.
As the 120-day deadline approached, judges in New Jersey opted not to extend Habba's service, instead voting to appoint her deputy, Desiree Leigh Grace, as the new U.S. attorney. This decision faced immediate backlash from Attorney General Pam Bondi, who dismissed Grace from her position.
In a bid to circumvent the district court's decision, President Trump and his administration executed a multi-step maneuver to keep Habba in her role as U.S. attorney. This included withdrawing her nomination, having her resign as interim U.S. attorney, and subsequently appointing her as special attorney and first assistant U.S. attorney. Ultimately, with the U.S. attorney position vacant, Habba was elevated to acting U.S. attorney under the FVRA.
The judges on the 3rd Circuit expressed concerns that the Trump administration's rationale for Habba's appointment could enable the Justice Department to sidestep the Vacancies Act, potentially allowing anyone to hold a U.S. attorney position indefinitely. Judge Michael Fisher stated that this interpretation could undermine the constitutional process of presidential appointments and Senate confirmations, effectively nullifying the FVRA's requirements.
This ruling, backed by a bipartisan panel including Judge L. Felipe Restrepo and Judge D. Brooks Smith, signals a critical moment in the ongoing debate about the appointment of U.S. attorneys and the need for adherence to established legal frameworks.