Court Affirms Ruling That Alina Habba Served Unlawfully as U.S. Attorney
A New Jersey appeals court on Monday said it would not reconsider its decision that found Alina Habba was serving unlawfully as the U.S. attorney in New Jersey, dealing a blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to keep its preferred federal prosecutors in power.
Ms. Habba, a former personal lawyer to President Trump, left the office in December, a week after the decision came down. She is now a senior adviser to Attorney General Pam Bondi and oversees U.S. attorneys across the country.
But the Justice Department had asked for a full panel of judges on the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to review that court’s December decision, saying that letting it stand “would invalidate widespread and longstanding executive branch practices.”
Such a review, known as an en banc review, is relatively rare, and typically happens when the constitutional questions at issue are particularly complex or weighty. Such reviews serve as an intermediate step before a case goes to the Supreme Court, to which the Trump administration could now appeal.
Neither a Justice Department spokesman nor Ms. Habba immediately responded to a request for comment. Ms. Habba is one of a number of U.S. attorneys, including Lindsey Halligan in Virginia and John A. Sarcone III in Albany, who judges have found were either appointed unlawfully or had their tenure extended unlawfully.
Mr. Trump named Ms. Habba to lead the New Jersey office on an interim basis in March. Her permanent appointment was opposed by the state’s Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, who traditionally hold sway in the process. District judges in New Jersey declined to extend her term.
When the judges appointed another prosecutor, Desiree Leigh Grace, to lead the office, the Justice Department fired Ms. Grace and elevated Ms. Habba to the role of acting U.S. attorney through a complicated series of maneuvers.
Judge Matthew W. Brann of the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled in August that Ms. Habba had been serving as the state’s top federal prosecutor without legal authority. His decision was upheld last month by an appellate panel that concluded the maneuvers violated the set of laws that governs vacancies in the leadership of federal agencies.
Ms. Habba, a former personal lawyer to President Trump, left the office in December, a week after the decision came down. She is now a senior adviser to Attorney General Pam Bondi and oversees U.S. attorneys across the country.
But the Justice Department had asked for a full panel of judges on the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to review that court’s December decision, saying that letting it stand “would invalidate widespread and longstanding executive branch practices.”
Such a review, known as an en banc review, is relatively rare, and typically happens when the constitutional questions at issue are particularly complex or weighty. Such reviews serve as an intermediate step before a case goes to the Supreme Court, to which the Trump administration could now appeal.
Neither a Justice Department spokesman nor Ms. Habba immediately responded to a request for comment. Ms. Habba is one of a number of U.S. attorneys, including Lindsey Halligan in Virginia and John A. Sarcone III in Albany, who judges have found were either appointed unlawfully or had their tenure extended unlawfully.
Mr. Trump named Ms. Habba to lead the New Jersey office on an interim basis in March. Her permanent appointment was opposed by the state’s Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, who traditionally hold sway in the process. District judges in New Jersey declined to extend her term.
When the judges appointed another prosecutor, Desiree Leigh Grace, to lead the office, the Justice Department fired Ms. Grace and elevated Ms. Habba to the role of acting U.S. attorney through a complicated series of maneuvers.
Judge Matthew W. Brann of the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled in August that Ms. Habba had been serving as the state’s top federal prosecutor without legal authority. His decision was upheld last month by an appellate panel that concluded the maneuvers violated the set of laws that governs vacancies in the leadership of federal agencies.
