A federal judge found prosecutors violated Daniel Richman’s constitutional rights by improperly handling and searching digital material seized in 2017 and ordered the Justice Department to return the files. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly called the conduct a “remarkable breach of protocol,” but required the government to deposit a copy of the data with a Virginia federal court so prosecutors could later seek access. The ruling complicates efforts to revive charges tied to former FBI director James Comey and is likely to be appealed.
Judge Orders DOJ To Return Data Seized From James Comey’s Longtime Friend, But Government Must Retain Copy
A federal judge has directed the Justice Department to return digital material seized in 2017 from longtime friend and former Columbia Law professor Daniel Richman, finding that prosecutors violated his constitutional rights and mishandled his records while pursuing an investigation tied to former FBI director James Comey.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said the items — an image of Richman’s hard drive together with files taken from his iCloud account and his Columbia University email — were handled with “callous disregard” for his privacy and professional confidences. The judge concluded prosecutors searched the materials without adequate safeguards or a proper warrant and called the conduct a “remarkable breach of protocol.”
“This Court concludes that although Petitioner Richman is entitled to the return of the improperly seized and searched materials at issue here,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote, “he is not entitled to an order preventing the Government from ‘using or relying on’ those materials in a separate investigation or proceeding, as long as they are obtained through a valid warrant and judicial order.”
As a significant caveat, the judge ordered that the government deposit a copy of all seized data with a federal court in Virginia. That measure, she said, preserves prosecutors’ ability to seek renewed access if they can persuade that court to authorize it.
Kollar-Kotelly temporarily blocked prosecutors’ access to Richman’s files last week after his lawyers filed an emergency motion in federal court in Washington, D.C., arguing that the government’s continued possession of his information was unconstitutional. The ruling follows renewed scrutiny after Comey was indicted in September on charges alleging a false statement to Congress and obstruction; those charges were later dismissed by a separate judge after finding the prosecutor in the case, Lindsey Halligan, had been improperly appointed.
The decision adds another legal obstacle for prosecutors seeking to revive the case against Comey. The Justice Department said it planned to appeal the ruling, though no formal appeal had been filed at the time of the order. Defense attorneys have also signaled they would challenge any new charges as barred by a five-year statute of limitations, which prosecutors contend was extended by the dismissal order.
Background: The Justice Department originally obtained Richman’s files in 2017 during its investigation into the aftermath of President Trump’s firing of Comey. Richman had allowed FBI agents to image his hard drive and, later, prosecutors secured search warrants for that image and for his email accounts. That earlier inquiry concluded without charges.
Implications: The ruling underscores judicial concern about how sensitive digital materials are handled during investigations and highlights procedural hurdles prosecutors face if they attempt to resume the Comey case. It also reaffirms that courts will police constitutional protections even when materials relate to high-profile inquiries.
