A new front in Trump's clash with the judiciary: Appointing prosecutors
Trump has submitted more than 30 U.S. attorney nominations to the Senate. Because of a rift between Republicans and Democrats, lawmakers haven't confirmed any of them. That has put federal judges in the hot seat because the law requires them to appoint lead district prosecutors if Congress doesn't. The president's picks can serve for 120 days in an interim capacity. Once the clock ticks down, the courts must decide if his nominees can stay.
Twice already, the answer has been no, prompting the administration to circumvent those decisions.
The biggest flashpoint has been Trump's former personal lawyer, Alina Habba, who was nominated to be U.S. attorney in New Jersey. She had been serving in an interim capacity since late March, but the state's federal district judges last week declined to install her, appointing her top assistant—a career prosecutor, Desiree Grace—instead. Hours later, Grace was fired by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. The White House has since withdrawn Habba's nomination and reinstated her in a new acting capacity, to reset the time limits.
'I am now the Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey," Habba wrote on X. 'I don't cower to pressure. I don't answer to politics."
Her office has been thrown into disarray, with some prosecutors fearing grand-jury indictments and plea deals could be challenged by defense attorneys over questions about Habba's status, said people familiar with the matter. It couldn't be determined whether Grace would go quietly. 'I'm prepared to follow that Order and begin to serve in accordance with the law," she wrote in a LinkedIn message after she was fired. She didn't respond to a request for comment.
Bill Essayli, interim U.S. attorney, speaking in June on the Palm Springs, Calif., fertility-clinic bombing.
Other fights are brewing. In Los Angeles, Bill Essayli, interim U.S. attorney, said his soon-to-expire appointment is unlikely to be extended by judges. Essayli is an outspoken Trump supporter who made waves trying to prosecute people who violently protested against immigration enforcement.
Several prosecutors in Essayli's office resigned in May after he proposed a misdemeanor plea deal to a sheriff's deputy who had been convicted by a jury of a felony charge of using excessive force.
Essayli said last week on Glenn Beck's radio program that he was 'up against very hostile judges" in Southern California and didn't expect to get their support. The Trump administration has 'tricks up our sleeves" to help the president get 'his prosecutors in place," he said.
Legal scholars and former federal judges said the recent clashes tie into Trump's push to assert executive power over another branch of government by disparaging judicial decisions and slow-walking compliance with court orders.
'I think that's part of his war on the judiciary," said Shira Scheindlin, a former federal judge. 'Who is ultimately in charge? Me, not you."
Each district has its own practices and culture for voting on whether to ratify an interim U.S. attorney. Typically judges examine a candidate's qualifications such as previous service as a prosecutor. They also consider whether the U.S. attorney's office is running well, including whether assistant U.S. attorneys are exiting the office in high numbers.
'They want somebody that they can trust who wouldn't use the position as a political bullhorn or for carrying out the administration's broader political agenda," said Jeremy Fogel, a former federal judge and the executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. The votes can lead to spirited conversations between judges, with some working behind the scenes to whip up support.
The Justice Department declined to comment about the clashes. In a social-media post last week after the New Jersey judges voted against Habba, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said, 'Alina is President Trump's choice to lead—and no partisan bench can override that."
Senate Democrats have blocked the nominees from easily clearing the chamber, saying Republicans did something similar during the Biden administration. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) has put a hold on Justice Department nominees in protest of Trump's acceptance of a luxury airplane from the Qatari government.
A dozen of Trump's U.S. attorney picks have passed through the first stage of confirmation by clearing the Senate Judiciary Committee. On Thursday, one of them was Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host picked after an earlier nominee, Ed Martin, lacked support among Republicans to win confirmation.
Republican and Democratic staff members on the Judiciary Committee are now engaged in talks to break the logjam, according to people familiar with the matter.
Among others facing potential votes from judges in the coming weeks is Jay Clayton, the interim U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who took office about two months after an acting U.S. attorney resigned in protest over the Justice Department's order to dismiss the bribery case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. More recently, the department's firing of career prosecutor Maurene Comey angered her colleagues and Southern District office alums, leading some to question whether Clayton had made efforts to stop it.
Clayton has made an effort to talk to judges, and some have asked him tough questions, including about the Adams case, said people familiar with the matter. Such meetings are typical.
An office spokesman declined to comment.
In northern New York, federal judges declined to appoint John Sarcone, Trump's interim pick for the job there—but didn't choose an alternative to take his place. In an unusual workaround, Bondi essentially gave Sarcone his job back through a series of maneuvers, including naming him as 'special attorney to the attorney general."
Stephen Saltzburg, a George Washington University law professor and former Justice Department official, said the selection process has worked smoothly in the past because previous presidents moved on to a new candidate when their picks weren't approved by a court or confirmed by the Senate. The law doesn't address the scenario playing out with Habba, he said. 'We are dealing with issues we never dealt with before," he said.
Write to James Fanelli at james.fanelli@wsj.com, Dave Michaels at dave.michaels@wsj.com and Corinne Ramey at corinne.ramey@wsj.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
2 minutes ago
- India.com
No Entry For GM Crops, Says New Delhi; India-US Trade Talks Hit A Sacred Wall
New Delhi: Genetically modified (GM) crops will not be crossing India's borders anytime soon, no matter how urgently the United States knocks. As trade negotiations between New Delhi and Washington enter a crucial phase, insiders say one red line is not up for discussion. 'There are things that are not about negotiation. Some things are a matter of principle,' said a senior official close to the development. That principle, sources say, is GM corn and soy. While American negotiators have made agricultural access a central demand, pressing India for a wider entry gate for U.S. farm goods, New Delhi is not blinking, especially on GM imports. Over the years, the issue has mutated from a mere trade disagreement into a symbolic fight over sovereignty, food safety and grassroots politics. The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has repeatedly flagged India's restrictions on GM products, calling them 'non-tariff barriers'. But Indian authorities remain unmoved, largely because of the hardline stance taken by domestic groups closely aligned with the ruling establishment. Last month, the message from Sangh affiliates was if America insists on forcing GM crops into the Indian market, there may be no trade deal at all. Carried in Business Standard, that warning echoed the sentiments of influential groups such as the Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (BKS) and the Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM), which have long opposed agricultural concessions to Washington, particularly in sectors like dairy and GM crops. Their argument? Food security. The BKS has often warned that allowing U.S. crops into India, especially without clear labelling or transparency, could sabotage domestic farming ecosystems and compromise health safety standards. On the other hand, the SJM sees this as a direct attack on economic self-reliance. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. U.S. officials have privately hinted at the urgency of the moment, pointing to a deadline set by President Donald Trump, who is seeking a revival of his trade agenda. Trump has marked August 1 as a red-letter day. If no interim deal is inked by then, India could be hit with reciprocal tariffs, potentially as high as 26 percent. Indian trade negotiators are not indifferent to that pressure. But according to officials involved in the process, the sixth round of talks will only happen in the second half of August after Trump's deadline expires. Any hope for a short-term resolution seems, at best, unrealistic. As one official put it, 'We are not looking at compromise in areas that touch the lives of millions.' In other words, GM corn is off the table. And perhaps, so is the deal, at least for now.
Mint
2 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump on Gaza talks collapse and Hamas hostage standoff: ‘I know what I'd do... but Israel is going to make a decision'
US President Donald Trump on Sunday said Israel is now facing a critical moment as ceasefire negotiations with Hamas have broken down. He emphasised that the Israeli government will soon have to 'make a decision' on how to proceed in Gaza. 'They [Hamas] don't want to give [the hostages] back,' Trump told reporters in Scotland. 'And so Israel is going to have to make a decision.' Trump added: 'I know what I'd do, but I don't think it's appropriate that I say. But Israel is going to make a decision.' The President also highlighted ongoing US aid efforts to Gaza, lamenting the lack of international recognition. 'We gave $60 million two weeks ago for food, for Gaza,' Trump said. 'And nobody acknowledged it, nobody talks about it. It makes you feel a little bad when you do that, and you have other countries not giving anything.' Trump said some of his own supporters criticised him for providing aid to Palestinians, but he defended the move. 'There is a humanitarian reason for doing it,' he said. 'Will I do more aid? Yeah. The US is going to do more aid for Gaza but we would like to have other countries participate.' Trump claimed that without American assistance, conditions in Gaza would have deteriorated further. 'If we weren't there, I think people would have starved, frankly,' he said. 'They would have starved and it's not like they're eating well.' Trump called on other nations to contribute to humanitarian efforts in Gaza and expressed frustration at the lack of acknowledgment from the international community. 'It would be nice to at least have a 'thank you,'' he said. Trump's comments come as Israel faces growing criticism over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Over the weekend, Israel approved humanitarian airdrops and announced plans to establish corridors for United Nations convoys to distribute supplies. Earlier ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas collapsed last week, leaving the future of hostages and regional stability uncertain.
Economic Times
32 minutes ago
- Economic Times
U.S EU Trade deal: Who wins after tariff agreement - Donald Trump or Europe?
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads FAQs U.S EU Trade deal agreement has finally been chalked. In the end, Europe found it lacked the leverage to pull Donald Trump 's America into a trade pact on its terms and so has signed up to a deal it can just about stomach - albeit one that is clearly skewed in the U.S.'s favour. As such, Sunday's agreement on a blanket 15 per cent tariff after a months-long stand-off is a reality check on the aspirations of the 27-country European Union to become an economic power able to stand up to the likes of the United States or has long portrayed itself as an export superpower and champion of rules-based commerce for the benefit both of its own soft power and the global economy as a whole. For sure, the new tariff that will now be applied is a lot more digestible than the 30% "reciprocal" tariff which Trump threatened to invoke in a few it should ensure Europe avoids recession, it will likely keep its economy in the doldrums: it sits somewhere between two tariff scenarios the European Central Bank last month forecast would mean 0.5-0.9 per cent economic growth this year compared to just over 1% in a trade tension-free this is nonetheless a landing point that would have been scarcely imaginable only months ago in the pre-Trump 2.0 era, when the EU along with much of the world could count on U.S. tariffs averaging out at around 1.5%.Even when Britain agreed a baseline tariff of 10% with the United States back in May, EU officials were adamant they could do better and - convinced the bloc had the economic heft to square up to Trump - pushed for a "zero-for-zero" tariff took a few weeks of fruitless talks with their U.S. counterparts for the Europeans to accept that 10% was the best they could get and a few weeks more to take the same 15% baseline which the United States agreed with Japan last week."The EU does not have more leverage than the U.S., and the Trump administration is not rushing things," said one senior official in a European capital who was being briefed on last week's negotiations as they closed in around the 15% official and others pointed to the pressure from Europe's export-oriented businesses to clinch a deal and so ease the levels of uncertainty starting to hit businesses from Finland's Nokia to Swedish steelmaker SSAB ."We were dealt a bad hand. This deal is the best possible play under the circumstances," said one EU diplomat. "Recent months have clearly shown how damaging uncertainty in global trade is for European businesses."That imbalance - or what the trade negotiators have been calling "asymmetry" - is manifest in the final only is it expected that the EU will now call off any retaliation and remain open to U.S. goods on existing terms, but it has also pledged $600 billion of investment in the United States. The time-frame for that remains undefined, as do other details of the accord for talks unfolded, it became clear that the EU came to the conclusion it had more to lose from all-out retaliatory measures it threatened totalled some 93 billion euros - less than half its U.S. goods trade surplus of nearly 200 billion a growing number of EU capitals were also ready to envisage wide-ranging anti-coercion measures that would have allowed the bloc to target the services trade in which the United States had a surplus of some $75 billion last even then, there was no clear majority for targeting the U.S. digital services which European citizens enjoy and for which there are scant homegrown alternatives - from Netflix to Uber to Microsoft cloud remains to be seen whether this will encourage European leaders to accelerate the economic reforms and diversification of trading allies to which they have long paid lip service but which have been held back by national the deal as a painful compromise that was an "existential threat" for many of its members, Germany's BGA wholesale and export association said it was time for Europe to reduce its reliance on its biggest trading partner."Let's look on the past months as a wake-up call," said BGA President Dirk Jandura. "Europe must now prepare itself strategically for the future - we need new trade deals with the biggest industrial powers of the world."A1. President of USA is Donald Trump.A2. US is levying 15 per cent tariffs on Europe.
