The United States Justice Department confirmed in court documents on November 28, 2023, that it intends to pursue a renewed prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey. This announcement came in response to a lawsuit filed by Comey’s friend and former attorney, Dan Richman. The case follows the dismissal of Comey’s previous indictment just weeks earlier and highlights ongoing legal complexities surrounding the evidence collected during the investigation.
In the recent filings, the Justice Department described the situation as both a “pending criminal investigation” and “a potential federal criminal prosecution.” The department argued that Richman’s lawsuit should not impede its ability to prosecute Comey for allegedly misleading Congress in 2020 regarding his approval for Richman to speak to the media. The Justice Department asserted that Richman’s legal actions are an attempt to hinder the government’s ability to utilize evidence in a separate criminal case.
Evidence and Legal Challenges
The court that previously restricted access to evidence from Richman’s files temporarily blocked the Justice Department from employing this material in any potential proceedings against Comey. This ruling effectively enjoined the government from continuing its investigation and possible prosecution, complicating the case further.
Federal investigators initially gathered evidence related to Comey and Richman years ago, obtaining warrants to access Richman’s iCloud account, digital devices, and his work email at Columbia University, where he serves as a law professor. Although the initial investigation did not yield any criminal charges, it resurfaced this year as the Justice Department sought to present evidence to a grand jury. This included allegations that Comey had lied when questioned about his interactions with the media.
Comey has pleaded not guilty to the charges of lying to Congress. The previous indictment was dismissed just before Thanksgiving 2023 by Federal Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who found that the interim U.S. attorney, Lindsey Halligan, had been unlawfully serving in her capacity at the time of the indictment.
Future Proceedings and Implications
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia plans to return to a grand jury to seek a renewed indictment against Comey. Following the dismissal of the previous case, significant revelations emerged regarding how the original indictment was secured. A judge indicated that some evidence presented to the grand jury might have been accessed without appropriate court authorization.
In response to the evolving legal landscape, Richman has sought to challenge the Justice Department’s actions, invoking constitutional protections against illegal searches and seizures. The Trump administration contends that federal judges should not prematurely obstruct criminal prosecutions. Prosecutors argued that Richman should not be allowed to permanently prevent the Justice Department from using his files in any future trials should a new indictment against Comey be obtained.
The Justice Department maintains that Halligan continues to serve as the U.S. attorney, despite the ruling that removed her from the role. Her involvement in the latest court documents regarding the Richman evidence battle underscores the chaotic situation in both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Northern Virginia federal court as this case unfolds.
