Comey Asks Court to Toss Indictment, Citing 'Fundamental Errors' in Grand-Jury Process

Former FBI director James Comey asked a federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, to dismiss the criminal indictment against him, arguing that "fundamental errors" in the grand-jury process and improper conduct by interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan fatally undermined the prosecution.

Comey's motion, filed Friday, follows revelations at a recent hearing in which prosecutors acknowledged the grand jury did not formally vote on the operative two-count indictment that accuses Comey of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. Defense lawyers say the grand jury rejected the only indictment Halligan presented and contend that proceeding without a valid indictment violates Comey’s Fifth Amendment protections.

Questions about Halligan's presentation. U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, who reviewed secret grand-jury transcripts in a separate proceeding, described a "disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps." He found two statements by Halligan that "on their face appear to be fundamental misstatements of the law" and could have compromised the integrity of the grand-jury process. Fitzpatrick also raised concerns about the provenance of much of the evidence used in the presentation.

Halligan, a former White House aide appointed interim U.S. Attorney days before the indictment, was the sole prosecutor who presented the case to the grand jury and the only signatory on the indictment. Defense filings emphasize her lack of prior prosecutorial experience and allege the appointment and rapid push for charges were politically driven.

Use of previously seized materials. Fitzpatrick noted that a substantial portion of the evidence relied upon at the grand-jury presentation came from materials seized years earlier in an unrelated FBI probe of Columbia law professor Daniel Richman, a friend of Comey. That earlier investigation closed in 2021 without charges. The magistrate judge said the government re-examined those materials in 2025 without seeking a new warrant, raising questions about scope and potential privilege.

Procedural dispute over the indictment. Public filings show the grand jury was initially presented with a three-count indictment, then rejected one count. Prosecutors say they drafted an edited two-count indictment reflecting the grand jury's decision and presented it to the magistrate judge for return. Defense lawyers contend the revised two-count document was never shown to — or voted on by — the full grand jury, arguing the lack of a validly returned indictment requires dismissal.

At a hearing before U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, prosecutors pointed to a transcript in which the grand-jury foreperson allegedly confirmed a vote on the two-count indictment. Defense attorneys replied that the government's late explanation conflicts with earlier representations and rests on an ambiguous exchange that does not cure the alleged defect.

Other pending defenses and next steps. Comey has pleaded not guilty to both counts and has also moved to dismiss on grounds that the prosecution is vindictive and selectively enforced. Separately, he challenges Halligan's appointment as interim U.S. Attorney as unlawful; the judge handling that claim said she expects to rule before Thanksgiving. No final rulings have been issued on the key motions.

"A president intent on prosecuting Mr. Comey before the statute of limitations expired directed the appointment of a White House aide...and she then rushed to secure an indictment while flagrantly violating basic grand jury rules in the process," Comey's lawyers wrote in their motion seeking dismissal.

The Justice Department has defended its handling, saying the full transcript, when read in context, shows Halligan's statements were proper and that the government remains committed to following the law and protecting grand-jury secrecy.