NEW YORK, United States — A federal judge has ruled that the US Justice Department unlawfully dismissed Maurene Comey, a former federal prosecutor whose father, James Comey, has been a longtime critic of President Donald Trump.
The judge ordered her retroactive reinstatement and back pay, finding that the administration had violated federal employment protections and constitutional requirements.
The ruling, issued by US District Judge Jesse M. Furman on Monday, October 26, 2026, rejected the administration’s argument that presidential authority permitted the dismissal of career federal prosecutors without complying with civil service laws.
The decision restores Comey’s employment status for the period between her dismissal in July 2025 and December 20 of that year, when she accepted another position. It does not require her to return to the Justice Department.
According to the 55-page court ruling, the administration violated the Civil Service Reform Act, which establishes procedures and protections governing the dismissal of federal employees.
Judge Rejects Administration’s Claim of Executive Authority
Comey was dismissed without advance warning or an opportunity to challenge the decision after nearly a decade as an assistant United States attorney in Manhattan.
The termination notice cited Article II of the Constitution, which establishes presidential executive authority, but did not identify misconduct, poor performance, or another specific reason.
In subsequent court proceedings, government lawyers maintained that former Attorney General Pamela Bondi had authorised the dismissal and possessed the legal authority to remove federal prosecutors.
Furman rejected the argument that this authority placed career prosecutors outside the protections established by Congress.
The judge found that although federal law allows the attorney general to dismiss assistant United States attorneys, the Civil Service Reform Act regulates how that authority may be exercised.
The administration had acknowledged that Comey’s dismissal was not based on her performance or misconduct.
Furman said the government’s interpretation of presidential authority conflicted with longstanding Supreme Court decisions permitting Congress to regulate the removal of certain federal officers.
He warned that accepting the administration’s position could undermine the constitutional division of authority between Congress and the executive branch.
The court also found violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and Comey’s Fifth Amendment due process rights.
Comey Alleged Political Retaliation
Comey filed her lawsuit in September 2025, alleging that her removal was connected to her father’s longstanding conflict with Trump.
James Comey served as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation until Trump dismissed him in 2017.
The former FBI director subsequently became an outspoken critic of the president.
In her complaint, Maurene Comey argued that she had been targeted because of her family relationship or political opinions attributed to her.
The court did not determine whether political retaliation was the reason for her dismissal.
Furman left her separate First Amendment claim unresolved and directed the parties to submit further legal arguments.
Before her dismissal, Comey had prosecuted or worked on several prominent federal criminal cases, including proceedings involving Ghislaine Maxwell, the associate of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and music executive Sean “Diddy” Combs.
She also worked on matters involving former Democratic Senator Robert Menendez.
Court records showed that her supervisors consistently gave her favourable evaluations, including outstanding performance ratings.
Her dismissal came despite those assessments and without a disciplinary finding against her.
Back Pay Ordered, With Compensation Yet to Be Determined
The court granted Comey reinstatement for the period during which she was improperly excluded from federal employment.
Furman also ordered the government to compensate her for lost earnings during that period, although the precise amount remains to be calculated.
He reserved a decision on whether she should receive legal costs and lawyers’ fees.
Comey has since moved into private practice, joining Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler as a partner in February 2026.
The ruling therefore concerns her previous employment status, compensation, and associated benefits rather than her immediate return to government service.
The case is among several legal disputes concerning the Trump administration’s authority to dismiss federal employees.
According to Reuters, the lawsuit raised questions about protections available to career prosecutors who serve across successive presidential administrations.
The decision comes as Trump continues to face legal challenges over the scope of executive authority during his second term.
In Comey’s case, the court concluded that the government had exceeded the removal powers available under existing law.
The Justice Department’s legal options include seeking appellate review of the ruling.
