Does Trump Have the Power to Install Jeanine Pirro as Interim U.S. Attorney?
President Trump's announcement that he was making the Fox News host Jeanine Pirro the interim U.S. attorney in Washington has raised questions about whether he had legitimate legal authority to do so.
Under a federal law, the attorney general can appoint an interim U.S. attorney for up to 120 days. But soon after taking office in January, the Trump administration installed a Republican lawyer and political activist, Ed Martin, in that role.
The question is whether presidents are limited to one 120-day window for interim U.S. attorneys, or whether they can continue unilaterally installing such appointees in succession — indefinitely bypassing Senate confirmation as a check on their appointment power. Here is a closer look.
What is a U.S. attorney?
A U.S. attorney, the chief law enforcement officer in each of the 94 federal judicial districts, wields significant power. That includes the ability to start a criminal prosecution by filing a complaint or by requesting a grand jury indictment. Presidents typically nominate someone to the role who must secure Senate confirmation before taking office.
What is an interim U.S. attorney?
When the position needs a temporary occupant, a federal statute says the attorney general may appoint an interim U.S. attorney who does not need to undergo Senate confirmation. The statute limits terms to a maximum of 120 days — or fewer, if the Senate confirms a regular U.S. attorney to fill the opening.
Is the president limited to one 120-day window?
This is unclear. The ambiguity underscores the aggressiveness of Mr. Trump's move in selecting Ms. Pirro. Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that Democrats on the panel 'will be looking into this.'
'Naming yet another interim U.S. attorney for D.C. is an untested and unprecedented use of the interim appointment authority that is contrary to congressional intent, undermines the Senate's constitutional advice and consent role and could subject the interim appointee's actions to legal challenge,' he said in a statement on Friday.
There are two conventional understandings of what might happen 120 days after the appointment of an interim U.S. attorney if the Senate still has not confirmed anyone. Each carries potential limits for Mr. Trump. The installation of Ms. Pirro suggests he is trying to establish a third option that would give him broader power.
What's the judicial option?
According to the law, if an interim appointment expires after 120 days, the district court can appoint a U.S. attorney until the vacancy is filled.
This option could result in the appointment of a U.S. attorney the president does not like. That, in turn, raises the question of whether the president could fire that person, a topic that is somewhat contested.
Normally in the law, the official who appoints is the one who can fire. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in a 1979 opinion, concluded that while an attorney general may not remove a court-appointed U.S. attorney, the president does have that power.
In 2018, the Trump administration ousted the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, Geoffrey S. Berman, who had first been appointed on an interim basis by the administration before being reappointed by a court. Attorney General William P. Barr tried to fire him, but Mr. Berman balked until Mr. Trump himself removed him. Mr. Berman did not challenge his firing in court.
What's the acting option?
The Vacancies Reform Act generally addresses how presidents may temporarily fill open positions that normally require Senate confirmation. It allows the president to designate certain people as acting officials.
It is not clear whether a president who installed an interim U.S. attorney can follow that move by appointing an acting one, further avoiding a judicial appointment or Senate confirmation. But in a 2003 opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel concluded that Congress gave presidents the power to do so.
Still, Mr. Trump's choices would be constrained. Someone selected for an acting role must already be serving in another Senate-confirmed role, or have been in a senior position at the same agency for 90 days before a vacancy. As a result, Mr. Trump cannot install outsiders like Ms. Pirro as acting U.S. attorneys.
What's the third option Ms. Pirro appointment raises?
By naming Ms. Pirro, Mr. Trump appears to be trying to establish that he has the power to make successive interim appointments for U.S. attorneys, indefinitely bypassing the Senate confirmation process.
The administration has not explained its legal theory. But legal experts have pointed to a likely argument that would support its action. It relies on a potential loophole in the law's text.
For one, the law does not expressly forbid successive interim appointments. For another, it says the court's power to name the next temporary U.S. attorney is triggered when an interim appointment 'expires' after 120 days. But Mr. Trump ousted Mr. Martin shortly before he reached his 120th day, so his term never expired.
A literal interpretation of the text, which arguably disregards the purpose and intent of Congress, could conclude that it permits successive appointments of interim U.S. attorneys who could each get a fresh 120-day window if they leave before their terms expire.
Are there any legal guideposts?
Since the 19th century, courts could temporarily fill vacant U.S. attorney positions. But the attorney general's ability to first appoint an interim one dates only to a November 1986 law. There is no definitive Supreme Court ruling interpreting the law, but it has occasionally drawn attention.
A footnote in an Office of Legal Counsel opinion about interim U.S. marshals says that in November 1986, Samuel A. Alito, then a lawyer in the office, wrote an opinion 'suggesting that the attorney general may not make successive interim appointments.'
That opinion by the future Supreme Court justice does not appear to be public. It is not clear whether the office ever revisited the topic in other opinions the Justice Department has kept private.
A passing comment in a 1987 opinion by a federal judge in Massachusetts — in a case involving acting U.S. attorneys, not interim ones — cuts the other way.
'Although the drafters appeared to envision that the district court would act at the expiration of an interim appointment,' the judge wrote, 'it is not clear from this court's reading of the statute that the attorney general himself would be foreclosed from making a second interim appointment.'
There appear to have been a few successive interim appointments in the past, but they did not seem to attract much attention or lead to precedent-setting court tests.
In 2007, when Congress last altered the interim U.S. attorney law, the Congressional Research Service told lawmakers that it had identified several instances of successive interim appointments, including one person who 'received a total of four successive interim appointments,' according to a House report about that bill. The report did not contain specific details.
What's the risk?
For one, Mr. Trump is opening the door to a scenario in which the enforcement of criminal law in Washington — and in any other district where he repeats this move — could be disrupted.
People who are indicted for crimes in cases that Ms. Pirro approves could challenge their charges on the grounds that she was improperly appointed. Should the Supreme Court rule against the administration, the result would call into question every case she signed off on.
A similar situation happened last year, when a federal judge in Florida threw out a criminal case against Mr. Trump on the grounds that the special counsel prosecuting him, Jack Smith, had been improperly appointed. In 2020, a court struck down certain actions by the Department of Homeland Security, ruling that Mr. Trump had unlawfully appointed Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II to lead U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Should the Supreme Court side with the administration, presidents would face no clear limit on their ability to bypass Senate confirmation and serially install such prosecutors — not just in Washington, but across the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
8 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses
BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally' injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrails vs. contrails Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. Cloud seeding While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. Geoengineering While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. Taking focus In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said. ___ Associated Press writers Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida, and Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota, contributed to this story.
New York Times
8 minutes ago
- New York Times
Three Days of Protest in L.A.
An extraordinary weekend of protest ignited in Los Angeles after federal immigration authorities conducted a series of immigration raids across the region Friday. Over the next two days, the protests were limited in size and occurred only in a few pockets of the area. But in some of the clashes with demonstrators, law enforcement officers responded with crowd-control munitions, tear gas and flash-bang grenades. President Trump activated the California National Guard without the assent of Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday, an unusual move the governor described as 'intentionally designed to inflame the situation.' By Sunday, several hundred troops had been dispatched to the city as protesters gathered outside a detention center in downtown Los Angeles, though most troops appeared not to engage with protesters. City and state leaders condemned the deployment, including Mayor Karen Bass, who called it 'a chaotic escalation.' But Ms. Bass also urged protesters to follow the law and said not all demonstrators had been entirely peaceful. Some defaced self-driving Waymo cars and a group ventured onto the 101 freeway, bringing traffic to a halt. Outside of downtown, life went on as normal in most parts of the city. But Mr. Trump painted a darker picture, saying the city had been 'invaded and occupied' and any efforts to impede federal immigration officials would be seen as a 'form of rebellion.' Sunday, June 8 Waymo self driving cars were vandalized and set on fire as protests intensified. Officers from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the city police department all worked to contain the unrest. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
CBS News
15 minutes ago
- CBS News
NYC Mayor Adams signs executive order, proposes legislation to define antisemitism
Sunday marked one week since a firebomb attack in Boulder, Colorado targeted people at a rally who were calling for the hostages in Gaza to come home. Thousands showed up in solidarity not only in Boulder but also in New York City, where Mayor Eric Adams took action to protect Jewish New Yorkers. Codifying the IHRA definition of antisemitism in NYC At a synagogue in Tribeca, the mayor signed an executive order to combat antisemitism. "I am signing an executive order to implement the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition," Adams said. The definition would include accusing Jews of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust, and blaming Jews for Israel's actions. "If a city-funded organization denies the right of the Jewish people, the right to self determination, this definition gives us tools to crack down," Adams said. Given the fact that the Jewish community makes up 10% of the city's population, yet half the hate crimes are antisemitic, the mayor also called on the City Council to immediately codify the definition into law. Rally held in Boulder, Colorado Shofars were blown in Boulder, Colorado, marking the start of a new kind of strength bringing thousands together for Sunday's Run for Their Lives. A heavy police presence, including snipers on rooftops, watched over the crowd one week after an attack the injured 15 people, including a Holocaust survivor. They gathered peacefully to call for the release of the hostages taken from Israel into Gaza. Manhattan resident Moshe Lavi, whose brother-in-law, Omri Miran, is one of the people being held in captivity, flew to the rally on behalf of all hostage families. He told the crowd, "We will demand Hamas to let our people go." "It's a laid-back community. It was shocking," Denver resident Idi Jackson said. "I just felt that I wanted to be part of the community." "I got teary eyed. I got choked up. It's just an amazing outpouring of both community support and law enforcement," another person said. New Yorkers cannot be silent, UJA Federation CEO says There was a similar rally held in Central Park, with attendance three times the size of its usual number, according to organizers. "The fact that that could happen in this country makes it all the more important for us in New York, the largest Jewish community in world outside of Israel, to not be silent," said Eric Goldstein, CEO of the United Jewish Appeal Federation of New York. To mark 611 days in captivity, attendees held up the number 55, representing the remaining hostages. Around 20 are believed to be alive. Released hostage Raz Ben Ami told the crowd her husband, who was freed by Hamas a few months ago, lost nearly half is body weight from starvation. "Once in three weeks they let him see TV and they saw the rallies and that's what kept them strong," Ben Ami said.
