A federal judge has disqualified Sigal Chattah from her role as Acting U.S. Attorney in Nevada, declaring her appointment invalid. This ruling comes after Chattah was initially appointed to serve as Interim U.S. Attorney earlier this year by President Trump. However, just before her 120-day interim period was set to end, she resigned and quickly reentered as Acting U.S. Attorney. This move struck a nerve with anti-Trump prosecutors, who wasted no time in filing motions to challenge her appointment.
U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell delivered a clear and decisive ruling on Tuesday in a lengthy, 32-page document. He stated that Chattah was “improperly serving” in her position. “Ms. Chattah is disqualified from supervising these cases or any attorneys in the handling of these cases,” Judge Campbell asserted. Despite disqualifying Chattah, he did not dismiss ongoing indictments. Instead, he ordered that Chattah’s cases be reassigned to the District Judges in Nevada, maintaining that he would be available to manage additional related motions if necessary.
This ruling holds significant weight, as it marks the second instance a federal judge has removed a Trump-appointed Acting U.S. Attorney from their post. Notably, last month, U.S. District Judge Mathew Brann disqualified Alina Habba from her position as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey. That decision came after a challenge to Habba’s authority, spurred by a perceived conflict of interest among judges who had previously ousted her from a similar interim role.
The scrutiny surrounding Habba’s appointment revealed significant tensions within the justice system. Her earlier rise to the role was met with resistance, particularly following a pressure campaign led by Democrat Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Eventually, federal judges opted not to extend Habba’s term as interim U.S. Attorney, a move that reflected the contentious relationship between the Trump administration and certain judicial elements.
In the current landscape, Trump’s challenges in the judicial arena fuel speculation about his next steps. Recently, he announced intentions to file a lawsuit aimed at stopping Senator Chuck Grassley from obstructing Habba’s confirmation as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey. Such moves highlight the ongoing political strife that shapes judicial appointments.
As the legal terrain continues to shift, the implications of these rulings extend beyond individual cases. The actions of judges like Campbell and Brann underscore an ongoing struggle over the control of U.S. attorneys, particularly those aligned with the Trump administration. These disqualifications raise concerns about the stability and continuity of federal legal leadership during a contentious political climate.
The fallout from these rulings presents a reminder of the intricate interplay between law and politics, especially as new legal battles loom on the horizon. Each decision carries the potential to influence not only the individuals involved but also the broader dynamics between various branches of government. The landscape remains fraught with tension as both Trump and his former allies navigate what lies ahead.
"*" indicates required fields
