President Donald Trump speaks in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House after an unspecified threat at the annual White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner in Washington on Saturday, April 25, 2026, as acting Attorney General Todd Blanche looks on (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).
The Trump administration is asking a federal court to halt discovery in a lawsuit brought by a former federal prosecutor who says he was unlawfully fired.
In a nine-page motion filed Thursday, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a Miami federal court to stay discovery until it resolves the government’s forthcoming motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
Discovery-related matters in the case have been assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein. Other proceedings presumably remain before U.S. District Judge Kevin Michael Moore, a George H.W. Bush appointee.
In the underlying lawsuit, Will Rosenzweig alleges that then-Attorney General Pam Bondi fired him in September 2025 through an email.
The abrupt termination notice arrived while Rosenzweig was traveling with his family for Rosh Hashanah. It followed a conservative commentator’s public criticism of a years-old blog post in which Rosenzweig, before joining the government, had criticized President Donald Trump.
Rosenzweig filed a 57-page complaint in early August, accusing the administration of First Amendment retaliation, violating the separation of powers and committing several other legal violations.
“The First Amendment forbids the government from making approved politics a qualification for public service,” the complaint states. “The Department of Justice did exactly that. Three hours after an online political commentator surfaced a blog that Plaintiff Will Rosenzweig had written as a private citizen, before he entered government, the Department summarily fired him from his position as a federal prosecutor.”
The court issued its operative discovery order in late August. The order established the discovery process and scheduled a final discovery conference for February 2027.
The DOJ now wants that process suspended.
The government argues that “Rosenzweig’s claims are precluded by the channeling provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.”
If the court accepts that position, the district court would ultimately lack jurisdiction over the lawsuit.
The Trump administration acknowledges that Rosenzweig initially pursued his claims before the Merit Systems Protection Board, which has already dismissed his case.
However, the DOJ argues that Rosenzweig still has additional avenues available through that administrative process and must exhaust them.
“The MSPB is the appropriate forum to determine whether, as Rosenzweig claims, his removal was a prohibited personnel action,” the motion states. “To the extent the circumstances of his removal may raise constitutional questions, that does not confer the right to proceed directly to district court. Instead, Rosenzweig may appeal constitutional questions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.”
The DOJ also previews arguments it plans to make in its motion to dismiss, saying those arguments reinforce its position that the dispute belongs in the MSPB process.
The government contends that Rosenzweig’s lawsuit “bears many similarities” to a case brought by Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey. In that case, she alleged that she was wrongfully terminated as an assistant U.S. attorney after officials cited Article II as the basis for her dismissal.
“In a hearing on Defendants’ request to stay discovery, the Court recognized the parties’ dispute whether the proper forum for the plaintiff’s case was the [MSPB],” the DOJ’s motion states.
The filing summarizes the result of a hearing in the Maurene Comey litigation:
[T]he Court concluded that “it would be inappropriate to authorize discovery — let alone adjudicate the thorny disputes (over matters such as executive privilege) that would likely arise in the event that discovery is authorized — until the Court confirms that it has subject-matter jurisdiction, except if such discovery is relevant to the jurisdictional question itself.”
“Defendants respectfully request the Court to stay discovery until the Court rules on Defendants’ forthcoming motion to dismiss,” the motion concludes.
The post ‘Would be inappropriate’: Trump admin seeks stay of discovery in fired assistant US attorney’s lawsuit first appeared on Law & Crime.
