Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is making headlines with a decisive move to fire James Hundley, who was recently appointed as Interim U.S. Attorney by Virginia judges. This firing underscores a significant point about the role of judges in selecting U.S. Attorneys. As Blanche put it, “Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, POTUS does,” reflecting a commitment to upholding constitutional authority as outlined in Article II.
The backdrop to this development is complex. In November, U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie dismissed the criminal cases involving prominent figures like James Comey and Letitia James. Notably, Currie also invalidated the appointment of U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan. In response, former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi intervened, granting Halligan a new designation as a “special attorney.” This role empowered Halligan to engage in legal proceedings despite the controversy surrounding her appointment. Nevertheless, Judge Currie maintained that Halligan could not serve as Interim U.S. Attorney, leading to her eventual resignation.
Virginia judges swiftly moved to fill the vacancy left by Halligan, elevating James Hundley, a seasoned litigator with over 35 years of experience, to the Interim U.S. Attorney position. However, this decision did not sit well with Blanche, who acted immediately to terminate Hundley’s appointment. His swift action suggests an effort to reassert the authority of the executive branch over judicial appointments.
Blanche’s actions also reflect a broader narrative surrounding the executive and judicial branches’ interplay. The insistence that judges do not possess the authority to select U.S. Attorneys resonates as a call for adherence to constitutional norms. His tweets encapsulate this stance with a blend of urgency and clarity, reflecting his commitment to maintaining a clear demarcation between the powers of the presidency and those of the judiciary.
The recurring theme of judicial appointments raises important questions about governance and the balance of power in the federal system. Blanche’s administration of justice appears intent on challenging what could be perceived as judicial overreach in the appointment process for U.S. Attorneys. The immediate terminations serve as a reminder of the president’s decisive role and signal that changes may be forthcoming in how appointments are made moving forward.
As Blanche takes firm action, the legal community and political observers alike will watch closely to see how these shifts impact ongoing legal proceedings and the broader landscape of federal prosecution. The unfolding situation emphasizes the tension and complexity within the power dynamics of American governance, especially in a time of heightened political scrutiny and polarization.
"*" indicates required fields
