DOJ Shocks Court, Refuses to Follow Judge’s Order in Major Case

UPDATE: In a stunning move, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has just announced it will disregard a federal judge’s order in a high-profile criminal bank fraud case involving New York Attorney General Letitia James. This unprecedented decision, made on September 26, 2023, raises significant questions about the DOJ’s approach to prosecutorial transparency and accountability.

The presiding judge had mandated federal prosecutors to provide discovery related to James’ motion to dismiss the case on grounds of vindictive prosecution. However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Roger Keller issued a filing stating that the DOJ would not comply, citing legal standards that restrict discovery until the defendant can present substantial evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. Keller emphasized that the current order was “premature” given the stringent requirements for such claims.

Legal experts have expressed shock at this unusual filing, noting that it defies typical judicial protocol. “Unusual filing in Tish James case,” remarked Politico legal analyst Josh Gerstein on social media platform X. “The DOJ says it isn’t complying with the judge’s order to turn over discovery on the selective prosecution issue. Normally, prosecutors would seek to reconsider the order, but instead, they’ve filed a ‘notice’ telling the judge no.”

This development is particularly notable as it follows a series of missteps by Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s acting U.S. attorney, who was appointed under questionable circumstances. The DOJ has proactively endorsed her appointment and the charges she is bringing in an attempt to prevent federal court disqualification.

The implications of the DOJ’s refusal to comply with the court order are significant, not just for the parties involved but for the integrity of the justice system itself. This case could set a precedent for how federal prosecutors interact with judicial mandates in politically charged cases.

As this story develops, observers will be closely monitoring the potential fallout from the DOJ’s decision. Legal analysts are urging the public to watch for the judge’s next steps in response to this dramatic turn of events. Will the court take action against the DOJ’s noncompliance, or will this escalate into a deeper conflict between judicial authority and prosecutorial discretion?

Stay tuned for updates as we continue to follow this urgent and evolving situation.