Trump's DOJ Sidesteps Norms to Boost Ally Alina Habba as US Attorney
The actions of the Justice Department to shield interim US Attorney Alina Habba, Trump's former personal attorney, could foreshadow other fights over chief federal prosecutors holding temporary posts in blue states like California, New York and Nevada.
Federal judges in New Jersey said Tuesday they would not extend Habba's four-month tenure, the longest she could serve without US Senate confirmation. When the judges bypassed Habba to pick her deputy, Attorney General Pam Bondi then slammed 'politically minded judges' for overstepping their authority. She fired the judges' choice, Desiree Grace, hours later.
Habba's term is set to expire at the end of the week, and what happens next is anyone's guess. But Trump and his appointees have routinely assailed judges who resist him in court cases, and they've shown a recent willingness to push the boundaries of statutes on appointment to protect their choices.
'It's a little unclear as to how this will all shake out,' said Jennifer Selin, an associate law professor at Arizona State University who researches US attorney appointments. The law on appointing interim US attorneys wouldn't prevent Trump from naming Habba as the interim again, but it's 'definitely on the fringes of law,' Selin said.
Spokespersons for the Justice Department and the US Attorney's Office in New Jersey declined to comment.
US attorneys typically serve four-year terms after they are approved by the US Senate, and they leave en masse with the change of a presidential administration. Under Senate custom, if a home-state senator opposes a president's US attorney nominee, the full body won't confirm their appointment.
More than 20 states have two Democratic senators but disputes may arise soon in Nevada, Illinois and California, where interim appointments are set to expire soon.
Trump has nominated Habba for a four-year term, but she's drawn strong opposition from New Jersey's two Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, has also vowed to hold up all Justice Department nominees over Trump receiving a gifted jet from the Qatari government.
District judges can appoint a US attorney until a vacancy is filled, but that is prompting pushback from the Trump administration. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche accused New Jersey's judges of 'a left-wing agenda, not the rule of law' and acting like partisans and activists.
Such a posture is not a long-term recipe for success, said Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University. Every US attorney's office investigates and prosecutes criminal cases and represents the US in civil litigation. Its lawyers appear regularly in court before federal judges.
'An office that relies on the cooperation of judges to do its work usually doesn't get ahead by making war on them,' Richman said.
In the Northern District of New York, the Trump administration tested the bounds of its appointment authority this month after federal judges declined to extend the 120-day term of John Sarcone, the chief prosecutor. Bondi appointed Sarcone as 'Special Attorney to the Attorney General' and 'First Assistant US Attorney,' making him the acting leader under the federal law governing vacancies.
Sarcone is authorized to conduct the same legal proceedings as US attorneys may conduct, according to records that say his appointment is 'indefinite but may be terminated at any time.'
He could serve more than 600 days as an acting official under the vacancy statute, effectively bypassing the Senate, said Selin. Acting officials may serve under the vacancy law for up to 210 days, followed by up to two more 210-day stints if nominations for the seat fail in the Senate.
Trump's administration also named two successive interim leaders to serve as US attorney in Washington, DC, tapping Jeanine Pirro for a 120-day term after her predecessor, Ed Martin, lacked the Senate votes to advance.
'The Trump administration has been very strategic in using acting positions to navigate difficulties in the Senate,' Selin said.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
Jaishankar on Trump's India-Pak ceasefire claims: ‘No phone call between PM Modi and Trump from April 22 to June 17'
Dismissing US President Donald Trump's claims to have brokered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, Union External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Monday said that there was no phone calls between Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi from April 22 and June 17. 'No phone call took place between PM Modi and US President Trump between April 22 and June 17,' Jaishankar said. 'After we retaliated Pakistan's attack, we got phone calls saying Pakistan was ready to stop. But, we told them the request has to come from Pakistan's Director General of Military Operations (DGMO),' he told the Parliament during a debate on Operation Sindoor. 'Thanks to India's diplomacy, TRF – which owned up Pahalgam attack - designated as global terrorist organisation.' 'Multilateral groups such as Quad and BRICS condemned April 22 Pahalgam attack, so did many individual countries.' 'German foreign minister said India has every right to defend itself against terror and will support us; so has France and the European Union.' 'People who did nothing have the temerity to question government which brought down Bahawalpur and Muridke terror sites. Who thought that terror sites in Bahawalpur and Muridke will be brought down the way they were.' 'I'd like to inform the House that on May 9, Vice President JD Vance called the Prime Minister warning of a massive Pakistani attack expected in the next few hours. The Prime Minister, in his response, made it very clear that if such an attack occurred, it would be met with an appropriate response from our side. The attack did take place but was foiled by our armed forces. I think the House should collectively appreciate the performance of our armed forces in preventing what was a massive attack on the 9th and 10th of May.' "Operation Sindoor a new normal in how we respond to terror." 'The longest Pakistan has been under FATF grey list was under the Modi government.' 'Seven parliamentary delegations went to 33 nations, made India proud by explaining our zero tolerance towards terror to world leaders.' 'We are getting warnings about Pakistan-China collaboration, when this has been going on for 60 years.' US President Trump on July 23 (local time) again claimed credit for stopping a war between India and Pakistan, saying both countries were close to a nuclear conflict after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 civilians. In his remarks, Trump said jets were being shot down repeatedly and he had to step in to de-escalate the situation. "We have stopped wars between India and Pakistan. They were probably going to end up in a nuclear war. They shot down five planes in the last attack. It was back and forth, back and forth. I called them and I said no more trade if you do this. They are both powerful nuclear nations. Who knows where that would have ended up, and I stopped it..." Trump said. The statement came a day after the White House credited Trump's intervention with helping reach a ceasefire between India and Pakistan following India's Operation Sindoor, which targeted terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir (PoK) on May 7. (With inputs from ANI and PTI)
Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
'In no one's interest': China extends support to Brazil as Trump threatens 50% tariffs on Brasilia
China responded sharply to the US threat of imposing a 50% tariff on Brazilian goods, calling out Trump's aggressive trade stance. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun emphasised that 'tariff wars have no winners' and slammed unilateral actions, saying they 'serve no one's interests.' Show more Show less
The Wire
25 minutes ago
- The Wire
‘Op Sindoor Not Stopped Under Pressure': Rajnath Tells Parliament, Skips Mention of Pahalgam Attack Probe
Government With Modi absent, Singh opened the special discussion in the Lok Sabha but skipped naming the US President's claims of ceasefire mediation. He also said that instead of asking about Indian jets, opposition should ask how many Pakistani ones were downed. Defence minister Rajnath Singh speaks in the Lok Sabha during monsoon session of parliament. Photo: PTI New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi remained absent in parliament on Monday (July 28) as the Lok Sabha began a special discussion on the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor. Union defence minister Rajnath Singh, who opened the discussion, made only a passing reference to the April 22 terror attack, and made no reference to US President Donald Trump's continued claims of having mediated a ceasefire between India and Pakistan following the four-day long military confrontation. Instead, Singh said that the decision to stop hostilities was taken because India had already achieved its 'stated political and military objectives' and to say 'the operation was stopped under any pressure is baseless and completely incorrect". The discussion in parliament began in the Lok Sabha on Monday after months of pressure from the opposition to have a special session on the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor in the presence of the prime minister, although Modi was not present in the House today. Meanwhile, Singh's speech in Lok Sabha focused on Operation Sindoor and its achievements without making any mention of how the terrorists behind the Pahalgam attack had entered India, the status of the investigation against them and how they were allowed to flee. The only mention in Singh's about hour-long speech of the terror attack itself was when he said that the "inhuman and cowardly attack took place on April 22". "In this attack 25 innocent Indians and one Nepali civilian were killed. These innocent civilians were killed after asking their religion. This itself showed the inhuman and horrific nature of the attack. The attack was a test of India's tolerance," he said. Singh then went on to elaborate about Operation Sindoor, and repeated the claims already made by the Union government on the armed forces being given a free hand to undertake Operation Sindoor in which nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoK) were targeted on May 7. While the four day-long military conflict between India and Pakistan stopped following the announcement of a ceasefire by Trump, India has since maintained that the decision was taken bilaterally after the Pakistani DGMO called his Indian counterpart. This is despite the fact that Trump has continued to make the claim that he had used trade as leverage to bring the two countries back from the brink of nuclear war. While the opposition has been demanding that the Union government address Trump's claims, Singh, without taking the US President's name, said that the decision to halt the operations was not taken under any pressure. 'The objective of this operation was to destroy terrorist camps and target their supporters and to give the clear message that India has zero tolerance for terrorism. India only halted the operation because before and during the conflict its stated political and military objectives had been achieved. Therefore to say that the operation was stopped under any pressure is baseless and completely incorrect.' he said. While Operation Sindoor involved four days of military confrontation for the first time in decades, Singh said that the objective of the operation was not to 'start a war' or 'crossing the border or capturing territory.' 'I would also like to inform the House that crossing the border or capturing territory there was not the objective of this operation. The purpose of launching Operation Sindoor was to eliminate those terror nurseries that Pakistan had nurtured for years. Operation Sindoor was launched to deliver justice to those innocent families who lost their loved ones in Pak-sponsored terrorist attacks. Our forces only targeted those who, while supporting these terrorists, were continuously involved in attempting to attack India,' he said. 'The overall politico-military objective of Operation Sindoor was to punish Pakistan, which was waging a proxy war in the form of terrorism. For this reason, the Armed Forces were given complete freedom to choose their own targets and deliver a strong response. The purpose of this operation was never to start a war but to compel the adversary to yield through the demonstrative use of force,' he added. While questions have also been raised about the number of Rafale jets that India lost in the conflict, there has been no clear answer from the government except admissions like"losses are a part of combat" by the military leadership. Singh argued that while the opposition is asking how many Indian jets were lost, they did not ask how many Pakistan ones were downed. 'I want to tell the opposition that if you have to ask a question, then ask this question: was Operation Sindoor successful? The answer is, yes. If you have a question to ask, ask this: Have the terrorists who wiped the sindoor off our sisters and daughters been dealt with by our forces in Operation Sindoor, eliminating their masters? The answer is, yes. If you have a question to ask, ask this: were any of our brave soldiers harmed in this operation? The answer is, no, none of our soldiers were harmed,' he said. Singh further said that the focus should not be on 'relatively small issues' and only the results matter. 'When the goals are big, our focus should not go to relatively small issues. Because by constantly focusing on small issues, attention can shift away from major issues like the country's security and the honour and morale of soldiers, as is happening with some of our friends in the opposition. 'The result matters in the outcome of any examination. If a child scores good marks in an exam, then for us, those marks should matter. We should not focus on the fact that their pencil broke or their pen got lost during the exam. Ultimately, the result matters, and the result is that during Operation Sindoor, our armed forces fully achieved the objectives they had set,' he said. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
