A federal judge has dropped a legal bombshell on President Trump's choice for chief federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, raising sharp questions about the administration's approach to filling key roles.
The ruling, handed down by U.S. District Judge J. Michael Seabright on Tuesday, declared that Bill Essayli, acting U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, is unlawfully holding his temporary post, as reported by The Hill. Seabright found that Essayli's 120-day interim term expired by the end of July, rendering his continued service invalid.
While the judge allowed Essayli to remain as first assistant U.S. attorney, the decision marks the third time a Trump appointee has been rebuked for overstaying a temporary role. This pattern points to a broader struggle within the administration to secure Senate confirmation for its picks.
Essayli's tenure was extended through a curious move by Attorney General Pam Bondi, who named him first assistant just before his interim term ended. She also designated him a special attorney, seemingly allowing him to assume the acting U.S. attorney role once it became vacant.
Seabright, appointed by former President George W. Bush, expressed unease about this workaround, noting concerns from defense lawyers that his ruling offers "little remedy at all." Yet, he emphasized his duty to apply statutes as written, hinting at the limits of judicial intervention in such maneuvers.
Essayli, unfazed, took to social media platform X to downplay the ruling, stating, "nothing is changing." His confidence suggests the administration remains undeterred, even as legal challenges mount.
This isn’t an isolated incident for Trump’s legal team appointments. Alina Habba, acting U.S. attorney for New Jersey and a former personal lawyer to Trump, was disqualified in August after a judge found her 120-day term had lapsed.
Similarly, Nevada’s acting U.S. attorney Sigal Chattah faced disqualification last month from overseeing criminal cases due to an expired interim term. Both cases reflect a judicial pushback against what critics see as creative but questionable personnel moves by the administration.
Appeals are pending in both instances, with Habba still in her post while a skeptical appellate court reviews her case. These ongoing battles signal a rough road ahead for Trump's strategy of bypassing traditional confirmation processes.
The legal storm isn’t over yet, with a fourth challenge looming in the Eastern District of Virginia. Former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have contested the appointment of Lindsey Halligan, another Trump-selected interim U.S. attorney, in two high-profile criminal cases.
A hearing set for mid-November will address their objections, potentially adding another layer of scrutiny to the administration’s appointment tactics. The outcome could further complicate Trump’s efforts to install loyalists in critical positions.
Federal law does offer an alternative, allowing judges in the Central District of California to appoint a different interim U.S. attorney until a Senate-confirmed candidate emerges. This provision might be the only path to clarity if these disputes persist.
These repeated disqualifications highlight a tension between executive prerogative and statutory limits, leaving the Justice Department in a precarious spot. While the administration’s intent to place trusted figures in key roles is understandable, sidestepping congressional oversight risks undermining the very system it seeks to uphold.
Seabright’s own words underscore the dilemma: "This court’s role, however, is to apply the statutes as written and as interpreted by binding case law." His restraint, though frustrating to some, serves as a reminder that the law isn’t a suggestion, even for the most determined leaders.
For now, Essayli and others remain in limbo, their authority questioned but not fully stripped. As these cases unfold, they test not just the boundaries of legal appointments but the patience of a nation watching its justice system navigate uncharted waters.
