Trump Lawyer Habba’s Role as NJ Prosecutor Draws Court Doubt (1)

A federal appeals court panel questioned the Trump administration’s argument that it followed traditional processes when installing Alina Habba as the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey after her nomination to the role stalled in Congress.

The arguments Monday before the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit centered on the administration’s designation of Habba, President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, as interim US attorney and then acting US attorney. Challengers accused the administration of bypassing the Senate confirmation or judicial appointment processes typically used for districts’ chief law enforcement officials.

Members of the three-judge panel expressed skepticism over the argument from Henry Whitaker, counselor to the attorney general, that Habba’s designation was “consistent with longstanding practice” of the Justice Department. One judge pressed Whitaker on whether he could provide examples of similar US attorney appointments in the past.

“Well, I guess, I cannot,” Whitaker replied, but said there have been instances in which the executive branch has in “analogous contexts” exercised its authority through delegation.

The dispute over Habba’s appointment is the furthest along in the courts among several ongoing challenges to the Trump administration’s installation of loyalists as US attorneys in acting capacities, circumventing typical congressional confirmation processes.

Abbe D. Lowell, representing criminal defendants challenging Habba’s appointment, argued Monday that by granting Habba broad authority in her acting role, the Trump administration has “now constructed a way in which no one ever has to be confirmed.”

Habba was named interim US attorney March 28 before Attorney General Pam Bondi on July 24 made her acting US attorney.

The case is before Third Circuit Judge L. Felipe Restrepo and Senior Judges D. Brooks Smith and D. Michael Fisher.

The Third Circuit’s decision on Habba’s appointment could have implications for other cases involving acting US attorneys.

A federal judge for the US District Court for the District of Nevada ruled last month that Nevada’s acting US attorney, Sigal Chattah, was unlawfully installed to her role.

The decision by Senior Judge David G. Campbell centered on Bondi’s designation of Chattah as a first assistant to then select her as an acting US attorney. That move violated the processes set out under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, Campbell said in his ruling.

Challenges are ongoing to the Trump administration’s designations of Bill Essayli as acting US attorney in Los Angeles and acting New Mexico US Attorney Ryan Ellison.

Former FBI Director James Comey on Monday filed motions to dismiss charges brought against him by Lindsey Halligan, the interim US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Comey said charges that he lied to lawmakers and obstructed a congressional proceeding are “fatally flawed” because Halligan “was invalidly appointed to her position” and amount to “vindictive and selective prosecution.”

The case at the Third Circuit is on appeal from the US District Court for the District of New Jersey, where Judge Matthew Brann ruled on Aug. 21 that Habba is not “lawfully performing” the duties of US attorney.

Trump previously nominated Habba to serve a four-year term as New Jersey’s US attorney, but her nomination failed to advance in Congress after New Jersey’s Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, opposed her appointment.

Habba on Monday weighed in on the senators’ opposition, writing in an X post that she has “not had so much as a single conversation with New Jersey Senators, despite repeated outreach.”

“When millions of Americans voted for a change in leadership in November, they voted for a new direction,” Habba said. “That choice should not be undermined by political obstruction in Congress or by criminal defendants.”

The cases are USA v. Giraud, 3d Cir., No. 25-2635 and USA v. Pina, 3d Cir., No. 25-2636, arguments held 10/20/25.