In a significant legal decision this week, a federal appeals court ruled against the appointment of Alina Habba, former personal attorney of ex-President Donald Trump, as the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey. This decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a prior district court ruling, which determined that Habba’s appointment breached the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.

The controversy began when Trump nominated Habba for the U.S. Attorney role, a position requiring Senate confirmation which she did not receive. In a controversial series of moves, the administration sought to bypass this requirement. After district court judges refused to appoint her, the administration withdrew her nomination and appointed her to a role enabling her to serve in the position unofficially. This maneuver, described by a U.S. district judge as a “novel series of legal and personnel moves,” has now been deemed improper by the appeals court.

The court’s opinion highlighted several key points regarding Habba’s ineligibility. It stated that she could not be considered the Acting U.S. Attorney for New Jersey simply due to her appointment as First Assistant U.S. Attorney. According to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA), only the first assistant in place at the moment a vacancy occurs can assume the duties of the office automatically.

Moreover, the court emphasized that Habba’s prior nomination for the U.S. Attorney position barred her from serving as Acting U.S. Attorney under the FVRA’s rules. The opinion further noted that the Attorney General’s attempt to delegate all the powers of a U.S. Attorney to Habba was in violation of the FVRA’s exclusivity provision.

This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to established legal processes and the checks and balances intended to prevent executive overreach in federal appointments. As the legal proceedings unfold, this case will likely continue to spark discussions on the boundaries of presidential power and the intricacies of federal appointment laws.

“Additionally, because Habba was nominated for the vacant U.S. Attorney position, the FVRA’s nomination bar prevents her from assuming the role of Acting U.S. Attorney. Finally, the Attorney General’s delegation of all the powers of a U.S. Attorney to Habba is prohibited by the FVRA’s exclusivity provision,” the opinion said.

New Jersey’s two senators, both Democrats, lauded the decision, saying it “vindicates concerns we have long raised about the extraordinary and unlawful steps taken by the Trump Administration to keep Habba in office without Senate confirmation.” 

“The Court’s ruling underscores a simple but fundamental principle: U.S. Attorneys must be independent and installed consistent with the rule of law, not because of their political loyalty or through political maneuvering,” said the joint statement from Sens. Andy Kim and Cory Booker. “The Trump Administration’s attempt to bypass clear legal requirements to install a loyalist undermined the legitimacy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey and cast a shadow over the cases she oversaw.”

Monday’s ruling marks the first time a federal appeals court has ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to keep interim U.S. attorneys in their posts after their temporary appointments lapse, potentially resulting in nationwide implications for federal prosecutors installed in the same way as Habba. 

“The court’s decision affirms that U.S. Attorney Alina Habba is unlawfully and invalidly serving as the chief federal law enforcement officer in New Jersey, marking the first time an appeals court has ruled that President Trump cannot usurp longstanding statutory and constitutional processes to insert whomever he wants in these positions,” attorneys Abbe Lowell, Gerry Krovatin and Norm Eisen, who argued for Habba’s dismissal, said in a joint statement.  “We will continue to challenge President Trump’s unlawful appointments of purported U.S. Attorneys wherever appropriate.”

After Habba’s interim appointment expired and the district court sought to put in a new top prosecutor, the Trump administration placed her in a lower position — First Assistant U.S. Attorney — that allowed her to assume the top job once her original nomination was withdrawn. 

In a 3-0 decision, the appeals court concluded that Habba’s original nomination for the U.S. attorney position barred her from assuming the acting job. The court also rejected the argument that the attorney general has the power to delegate the powers of U.S. attorney to Habba. 

The ruling from the three-judge panel — composed of two judges put on the bench by George W. Bush and one by Joe Biden — comes on the heels of a high-profile decision last week disqualifying Trump’s handpicked prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, who had brought criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.