A setback for the Justice Department's bid to bring fresh charges against former FBI Director James Comey has emerged, as a federal judge temporarily blocks prosecutors from using certain evidence they relied on to obtain the original indictment.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly’s ruling, issued late Saturday, signals that prosecutors may still pursue new charges soon, but likely without citing communications between Comey and his close associate, Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman.
Comey faced a September charge of lying to Congress for denying that he authorized an associate to act as an anonymous source for FBI-related media coverage. In their case against him, prosecutors described messages between Comey and Richman that they argued showed Comey encouraging media involvement for FBI-related stories.
The underlying case collapsed last month after another federal judge ruled that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed by the Trump administration. That decision, however, left open the possibility that the government could retry Comey.
Following the dismissal, Richman and his attorneys sought to bar further access to his computer files obtained by the Justice Department through warrants in 2019 and 2020 in a prior media-leak investigation that was ultimately closed without charges.
Richman contends that the prosecutors relied on data beyond the warrants, retained communications they should have destroyed or returned, and conducted additional searches without warrants.
Kollar-Kotelly granted a temporary restraining order at Richman’s request, directing the Justice Department not to access the identified materials or share them without the court’s permission. The judge set a Monday deadline for the department to certify its compliance with the order.
In her ruling, she noted that Richman would suffer irreparable harm to his Fourth Amendment rights if the government continued to retain or circulate images of his computer and related data without safeguards.
A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the ruling or its implications for reviving any Comey charges.
Even if Richman’s communications could be used, it remains unclear whether new charges against Comey would be legally viable. Comey’s defense has pointed out that the congressional testimony in question occurred on September 30, 2020, which would place it beyond a typical statute of limitations.
Separately, the Justice Department recently failed in its attempt to obtain a new indictment against Letitia James of New York, another figure seen as an adversary of the Trump administration, when a grand jury declined to sign off on charges.
