Former FBI Director James Comey Seeks Dismissal of Federal Case

Former FBI Director James Comey has sought to dismiss the federal case against him, citing flaws in the grand jury process that left prosecutors without a valid indictment. His legal team argued that “fundamental errors” in the grand jury process undermined the indictment, with the defense claiming that the grand jury voted to reject the only indictment presented to it.

Comey has pleaded not guilty to false statement and obstruction charges tied to his 2020 congressional testimony. A grand jury indicted him in September, just before the five-year statute of limitations expired. However, at a hearing Wednesday, prosecutors acknowledged that the full grand jury did not review the final version of the indictment. This concession prompted Comey’s attorneys to argue that the government never secured a valid indictment within the required time limit.

The final indictment dropped one of three counts that Lindsey Halligan, the U.S. attorney appointed by President Donald Trump, initially sought. According to the motion, grand jurors rejected that three-count package and were never shown the revised two-count version that was ultimately filed. “Here, the grand jury voted to reject the only indictment that the government presented to it,” the defense wrote. “Because at least 12 jurors did not ‘approve the actual indictment,’ there is no valid indictment of Mr. Comey.”

The Justice Department attempted to reverse course Thursday, issuing a notice characterizing the issue as a misunderstanding and citing what it called a contradictory official transcript. Prosecutors said the grand jury did vote on the two-count indictment and described the earlier acknowledgment as a “clerical inconsistency” related only to the removed count. The department’s public position has otherwise remained limited to court filings, consistent with its policies on ongoing cases.

Comey’s legal team rejected the government’s explanation, arguing that it conflicted with earlier representations and relied on what they described as an “erroneous overreading of an ambiguous exchange” between the jury foreperson and a magistrate judge. They added that even if prosecutors could show the full panel received the indictment, other procedural problems were apparent, including the lack of a recorded presentation. The defense also pointed to what a magistrate judge this week called a “disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps,” noting that the judge granted Comey access to materials usually kept secret by the grand jury.

The order is on hold pending review by U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff. Comey’s attorneys said the narrow vote to indict and the lengthy deliberations heighten concerns about potential government misconduct. The challenge is one of several attempts by Comey to dismiss the case, including a bid to invalidate Halligan’s appointment and claims of selective prosecution. Judges have held hearings on two previous motions.

U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie is expected to rule on Halligan’s appointment by Thanksgiving. Jim Thomas is a writer based in Indiana. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Science, a law degree from U.I.C. Law School, and has practiced law for more than 20 years.

Politics