McGowan-Currie Shuts Down Indictments For Now, But Legal And Political Risks For Comey And James Remain Very Much Alive

Monday, November 24, 2025, 6:15 P.M. ET. 5 Minute Read, By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Englebrook Independent News,

WASHINGTON, DC.- In a dramatic ruling delivered Monday morning, U.S. District Court Judge Cameron McGowan-Currie, a Clinton appointee, dismissed the federal indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, but crucially did so without prejudice, meaning the Department of Justice retains the right to refile the same charges.

     The indictments in question were brought by Acting U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan. Defense teams for both Comey and James had argued that Halligan’s appointment was procedurally defective and urged the court to dismiss the cases with prejudice, permanently barring further prosecution. Judge McGowan-Currie refused.

     “The defects alleged relate to the procedural posture of the charging authority, not to the underlying conduct or evidentiary foundation,” the judge wrote today. “Dismissal without prejudice is the appropriate remedy.”

     The decision halts the current indictments, but it does not clear either defendant of the alleged criminal conduct, nor does it prevent renewed prosecution once the technical issues are addressed.

The Indictments And What They Alleged;

James Comey

     A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia returned an indictment charging Comey with two counts: one for making a false statement to Congress, and one for obstructing a congressional proceeding. 

     Prosecutors allege that during his September 30, 2020, testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey lied about whether he authorized an FBI leak and took steps to impede Congress’s investigation into the FBI’s 2016 Russia-campaign probe. Comey pleaded not guilty, and his legal team argued that his responses were literally correct, that the congressional questions were ambiguous, and that the grand-jury proceedings themselves were tainted. 

Letitia James

     According to a federal grand jury in the same district, Letitia James was indicted on one count of bank fraud and one count of making a false statement to a financial institution.  

     The indictment alleges that in a 2020 purchase of a Norfolk, Virginia property, James falsely claimed the home would be her “secondary residence” when applying for mortgage terms reserved for non-investment properties. Instead, prosecutors allege she treated the house as a rental investment property, thereby securing below-market loan terms and saving approximately $18,000 over the life of the loan. James, who built much of her political career on aggressive legal action against figures such as former President Donald Trump, now finds herself under indictment for allegedly making the very kind of false statements she once sought to punish.

What the Ruling Means, And Doesn’t;

     Despite the immediate headlines of “dismissal,” the key fact is: neither Comey nor James has been exonerated. The judge did not rule on the merits of the allegations themselves; she only found the appointment of Halligan to be legally defective.

For both defendants:

• The pendency of the indictments is over, for now.
• The underlying factual theories remain intact.
• The Justice Department retains the option to refile after correcting the procedural defects.

     Legal analysts say the ruling may actually strengthen the prosecutors’ position by highlighting their core case while forcing them to return with renewed legal legitimacy.

Political Implications And Perception;

Comey’s Predicament

     Once viewed as a champion of FBI independence, Comey now faces renewed questions about his credibility. His public insistence earlier this year that “let’s have a trial” now appears inconsistent with his legal team’s strategy, which focused heavily on procedural technicalities rather than inviting a jury’s verdict.

     Critics note that a defendant confident in his innocence would typically embrace a trial rather than seek escape hatches. That shift raises uncomfortable questions for his political and moral standing.

James’ Fall From The Pedestal

     Letitia James, who built her rise by vowing to “get Trump” and aggressively using her office to challenge corporate power, now confronts an indictment that echoes the very abuses of power she once decried. Her reliance on procedural defenses rather than facing the central allegations exposes her to charges of hypocrisy and double standards.

     Her case might be even more politically volatile because it underscores a broader narrative: the use of criminal law for political ends, and the potential vulnerability of those who wield power.

What Comes Next;

• The Justice Department can refile the same charges or bring new counts once the procedural defect with Halligan’s appointment is resolved.
• Both defendants may face renewed indictments in the near term.
• The political and legal stakes for both Comey and James have just been ramped up, rather than diminished, by today’s ruling.

     In short: Comey and James have won a reprieve, not a pardon.

Editor’s Note;

This report is based on official public filings, including the federal indictments issued by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia; contemporaneous statements from defense counsel; the written dismissal order issued today by Judge Cameron McGowan-Currie; and supporting documentation reviewed by Englebrook Independent News. Additional verification was conducted through federal court records, public statements, and Englebrook’s internal legal research archives. All information included in this report has been independently reviewed for factual accuracy in accordance with Englebrook Independent News’ editorial standards.