The Justice Department acknowledged that former Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the dismissal of federal prosecutor Maurene Comey before a judge ruled Monday that the firing violated civil service protections and constitutional limits on executive power.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ordered retroactive reinstatement and back pay for Comey, who prosecuted cases involving Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and Sean "Diddy" Combs. The department conceded that her July 2025 removal was neither for cause nor related to poor performance.
The ruling did not determine whether Comey was targeted because of her father, former FBI Director James Comey, or her perceived political views. It instead rejected the administration's argument that the attorney general could dismiss a protected career prosecutor without following statutory procedures.
"Congress granted the Attorney General power to remove Comey," Furman wrote, but "Congress imposed limits on that power - limits that, even Defendants concede, were violated in Comey's case."
The department identified Bondi as having authorised and directed the firing in a May 26, 2026, court filing. Furman noted that the identity of the actual decision-maker remained partly disputed and accepted the government's account for purposes of his legal analysis.
The dismissal memorandum was signed by Francey Hakes, then director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys. It cited Article II of the Constitution and federal law but identified no misconduct. Comey received neither advance notice nor an opportunity to respond.
Government lawyers argued that the attorney general's removal authority permitted dismissal without cause and that constitutional executive powers superseded statutory employment protections.
Furman rejected what he called a "sweeping and unprecedented theory of executive authority," saying it "flies in the face of nearly two centuries of Supreme Court precedent."
He also dismissed the department's alternative argument that firing Comey itself implied sufficient cause, calling that reasoning "borders on frivolous." The court reviewed favourable assessments from her nearly decade-long career in the Southern District of New York.
A May 2026 memorandum from then-acting Attorney General Todd Blanche seeking to ratify the dismissal did not cure its defects, Furman found. The attorney general's authority remained subject to civil service law.
Comey sued in September 2025, alleging that the administration had offered no legitimate explanation and had acted because of Trump's hostility toward her father, whom he dismissed as FBI director in 2017. She said her boss told her only that the decision "came from Washington."
The relief covers July 16 through December 20, 2025, when Furman inferred she had begun another job. It includes back pay and corrections to employment and retirement records without requiring her to leave her current position. The amount remains undetermined.
"The Department disagrees with this decision and will appeal in due course," a Justice Department spokesperson said.
Comey's attorneys said the ruling reaffirmed constitutional checks and balances and represented a victory for civil servants.
Her First Amendment retaliation claim remains unresolved. Furman gave Comey until November 9 to explain why it should continue given the relief already awarded, with the government allowed one week to respond. The court could dismiss that remaining claim without deciding whether political retaliation motivated her removal.
