LightNews LightNews
banner
dshutton.bsky.social
@dshutton.bsky.social
700 followers 1.4K following 18 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted
emptywheel.bsky.social
Here's how Tish James addresses Pam Bondi's Halloween time machine -- by calling it one.

Again, as a NAL, it would be a super cool assignment for law school to compare these responses.
Because this indictment violates both the Appointments Clause and Section 546, the Court must dismiss this case. After Attorney General James filed this motion to dismiss, Attorney General Bondi undertook a series of novel maneuvers to attempt to clean up the mess of Ms. Halligan’s unlawful interim appointment. See Gov’t Ex. A, ECF No. 43-1 (Oct. 31, 2025 Appointment and Ratification Order). But Attorney General Bondi does not have a time machine. None of Attorney General Bondi’s actions change the fact that when Ms. Halligan brought this indictment before the grand jury, apparently entirely on her own, she was not a government attorney. Attorney General Bondi could not, on October 31, 2025, appoint Ms. Halligan to a new prosecutorial position effective September 22, 2025. The government cannot point to any case indicating that so long as the government allegedly “intended” to vest the relevant official with the proper authority, an invalid appointment can be excused. Br. 21. It is what the Attorney General did, not what was in her mind, that determines whether the appointment was proper. All parties agree that “any government attorney can present a case to a grand jury or sign an indictment.” Gov’t Br. 2 (emphasis added). The problem is that Ms. Halligan brought this indictment as a private citizen with no authority to litigate on behalf of the United States. No amount of ex-post maneuvering can rescue this unlawful indictment from dismissal.
November 10, 2025 at 10:41 PM