A federal judge in Pennsylvania has sided with a pair of defendants who challenged Alina Habba’s authority to serve as acting U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey – a blow to President Donald Trump, who had made a series of complicated legal maneuvers to keep Habba in office.
Middle District of Pennsylvania Chief Judge Matthew Brann wrote in his 77-page ruling today that the Trump administration’s efforts ran afoul of federal law in several ways, and that Habba should not be allowed to continue prosecuting the two men who challenged her authority or any other defendants in the District of New Jersey.
“After reviewing several issues of first impression, the Court concludes that Ms. Habba has exercised the functions and duties of the office of the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey without lawful authority since July 1, 2025,” Brann wrote. “And because she is not currently qualified to exercise the functions and duties of the office in an acting capacity, she must be disqualified from participating in any ongoing cases.”
Brann, however, also issued an immediate stay of his own ruling “pending appellate proceedings in these matters,” so Habba may remain able to execute the duties of the U.S. Attorney’s office until the Third Circuit of Appeals weighs in.
Indeed, Attorney General Pam Bondi said that her department plans to “immediately appeal” the ruling: “[Habba] is doing incredible work in New Jersey – and we will protect her position from activist judicial attacks,” she said in a statement on social media.
An appeal would be heard by a three-judge panel on the closely divided Third Circuit, which includes New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware; its outcome could have nationwide implications for the selection of U.S. Attorneys and the separation of powers.
Habba, Trump’s former personal lawyer and a firebrand conservative, was first appointed as interim U.S. Attorney on either March 24 or March 28 – her exact start date is contested – to replace John Giordano, a different interim U.S. Attorney Trump had chosen a few weeks earlier. As interim U.S. Attorney, Habba had the full powers of the U.S. Attorney’s office at her disposal, but her tenure was limited to 120 days unless she could win confirmation by the U.S. Senate or get her term extended by New Jersey’s federal District Court judges.
Habba’s nomination was submitted to the Senate on July 1, but it never came up for a vote, likely in part because of vociferous objections from New Jersey Senators Cory Booker and Andy Kim. And on July 22, right as Habba’s term was expiring, New Jersey’s judges voted not to retain her past her 120-day tenure and instead appointed First Assistant U.S. Attorney Desiree Grace to replace her.
(The New Jersey District Court took a similar vote during Trump’s first term in April, after interim U.S. Attorney Craig Carpenito’s 120-day term ran out without confirmation from the Senate, but the result was the opposite: they chose to affirm Trump’s choice and retain Carpenito, and Carpenito served for the rest of Trump’s first term with little drama.)
After the vote to install Grace, however, Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi maintained that they – not the judiciary – had ultimate authority over U.S. Attorney picks, and executed a series of maneuvers to keep Habba in office. Bondi fired Grace from her role as First Assistant, Habba resigned her role as interim U.S. Attorney and withdrew her nomination from the Senate, and Bondi appointed Habba as the new First Assistant U.S. Attorney – which, in the absence of a U.S. Attorney, automatically elevated Habba to the post on an acting basis.
The bold scheme, evidently designed to get around a variety of federal laws adding checks and balances to the U.S. Attorney appointment system, quickly drew challenges from several New Jersey defendants who argued that allowing Habba to prosecute them would violate their rights. Julien Giraud Jr., under indictment on drug and weapons charges, filed the first challenge on July 28; real estate investor Cesar Pina followed suit two weeks later, and the two cases were quickly combined into one, which came before Brann for an August 15 hearing.
Both motions were originally filed with the New Jersey district judges who had been overseeing Giraud’s and Pina’s cases but were transferred to Brann’s Pennsylvania jurisdiction, presumably because the New Jersey judiciary was directly involved in the events of the case itself.
Lawyers for Giraud and Pina made a variety of arguments that all pointed to one inescapable conclusion: the President and Attorney General cannot indefinitely make U.S. Attorney appointments without input from either the Senate or the federal judiciary, both of which have roles to play that are enshrined into federal law. And if Habba’s appointment was illegitimate, they said, the entire system of justice in New Jersey was under threat as long as she remained in office.
“[Habba’s appointment] has direct, ongoing implications for the integrity of every prosecution in the District of New Jersey, including this one,” Giraud’s attorney, Thomas Mirigliano, wrote in a brief in advance of last Friday’s hearing. “The potential consequences cast uncertainty over the entire system, undermine public confidence in the administration of justice and demand prompt, decisive judicial intervention.”
The Justice Department, however, argued that the precise order of events Habba followed – as well as her separate designation by Bondi as a “Special Attorney” overseeing New Jersey – rendered her authority legitimate and unquestionable. Trump, the department wrote in one brief, had made his preference for U.S. Attorney clear, and it must be respected: “That is his prerogative; this Court cannot second-guess it.”
In his ruling today, Brann wrote that whatever Trump’s desires for the U.S. Attorney’s office may have been, federal statute specifically blocks several of the steps he took to keep Habba in office.
For one, Brann determined, Habba’s term should be understood to have ended on July 1 – not July 26, as the Justice Department argued – because the clock on the 120-day term limit began ticking on March 3, when Giordano was appointed, not March 28, when Habba was appointed. Brann said that the correct interpretation of federal statute gives presidential administrations 120 days total for interim U.S. Attorney appointments, a tenure that cannot be reset with successive appointments.
“Accepting the Government’s reading would give the Executive a permanent means of thwarting that provision by terminating every section [interim] appointment on its 119th day,” Brann wrote. “Taken to the extreme, the President could use this method to staff the United States Attorney’s office with individuals of his personal choice for an entire term without seeking the Senate’s advice and consent.”
Brann also concurred with Giraud’s and Pina’s arguments on two other key points. He ruled that because Habba was not First Assistant U.S. Attorney when the office first became vacant – i.e., when Biden-era U.S. Attorney Philip Sellinger resigned on January 8 – she was ineligible to become acting U.S. Attorney; her last-minute appointment as First Assistant in July, Brann said, is not a viable workaround. (Brann did not, however, make any determination on whether Habba was ineligible to become acting U.S. Attorney because her nomination had previously been submitted to the U.S. Senate for confirmation.)
And Brann determined that Habba’s “special attorney” designation, intended as a workaround to maintain Habba’s authority over New Jersey cases, flew in the face of limitations on who can execute the duties of a U.S. Attorney. Special designations like the one Bondi gave Habba “do not create alternative paths for authorizing someone to temporarily perform those functions and duties,” Brann wrote.
Underpinning the entire debate, though unmentioned in today’s ruling, is Habba’s status as an unabashed partisan Republican, a jarring profile for the normally staid U.S. Attorney’s office. Habba made headlines shortly before taking office for saying she hoped to use her office to help “turn New Jersey red,” and she’s since launched multiple investigations into Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy and his administration.
And Habba’s highest-profile case so far revolves around another Democratic elected official: Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-Newark), whom Habba charged with allegedly assaulting federal immigration officials during an oversight visit at an immigrant detention center in May. McIver has called the charges politically motivated and filed motions earlier this week to dismiss them entirely, though she hasn’t publicly weighed in on the dispute over Habba’s legitimacy.
This story was steadily updated, including at 9:44 p.m. with the news that the Trump administration intends to appeal the ruling.
Brann Habba opinion
