I guess it’s all academic since Halligan’s misconduct took place before this nomination. I am a little surprised Kuo didn’t mention this … but I guess since her nomination never got out of committee, it’s essentially the same as never having been nominated.
US Attorney - Nominated/Confirmed
To be a lawful US attorney, Halligan needs to be confirmed by the Senate. That never happened. The nomination on its own is meaningless to whether she was lawful or not. It is odd that no one has ever mentioned it before - like to the point I doubted whether it was true or not, but the cite is the actual source of info for that.
Interim US Attorney
The other way is to be lawfully appointed interim attorney until the Senate confirms you which is the source of debate/dismissal/appeal. Here, the interim period was used up so Halligan needed to wait for confirmation.
Special Attorney
The other other way to bypass all of that is to be appointed a special prosecutor. That was tried on Oct 31 in this case. Didn’t work because it tried to be retroactive to before the Indictment, and Bondi had already tried to appoint Halligan to be an interim at that time - can’t say Halligan is both. AG Bondi has broad discretion here, but I doubt she can appoint Halligan special prosecutor for the sole purpose of getting around being a valid US attorney.
In the future on Trump’s retribution tour, I imagine if DOJ can’t find a willing appointed US prosecutor (which do exist), they will go the special prosecutor route.
Yet another — albeit temporary — roadblock*, this time regarding admissibility of evidence, which strikes me as more substantial than an illegal prosecutor.
A federal judge dealt a setback Saturday to the Justice Department’s effort to re-indict former FBI Director James Comey, blocking prosecutors’ access to key evidence from email accounts and a computer belonging to close Comey friend and attorney Daniel Richman.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly granted a temporary restraining order sought by Richman’s lawyers, requiring that the evidence be sequestered pending a ruling on Richman’s claim that the government illegally retained his emails and other data.
“The Court concludes that Petitioner Richman is likely to succeed on the merits of his claim that the Government has violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures by retaining a complete copy of all files on his personal computer (an ‘image’ of the computer) and searching that image without a warrant,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in a four-page order filed Saturday, one day after Richman’s attorneys requested the emergency order.
--------------------------------Richman’s attorneys have argued that prosecutors and investigators were obliged to return or destroy the data once the initial investigations concluded and that the FBI appears to have examined data not within the scope of the warrants.
It’s unclear just how significant a lack of access to Richman’s records would be for the Justice Department’s efforts to re-indict Comey. Investigators would likely have access to some of the emails from other sources. However, Comey’s lawyers have already argued that access to Richman’s data tainted the investigation that led to Comey’s indictment in September on charges of lying to and obstructing a Senate committee.
And U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, who helped manage the Comey case, said the lone grand jury witness — an FBI case agent — may have viewed material that should have been protected, threatening the entire case.
No comment from the InJustice Department yet, though they will certainly argue otherwise. According to the article, they have till Tuesday to respond.
* Sorry, Discourse refused a preview. Something about a missing image.
Related.
Grand jury declines to indict N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James, less than two weeks after the first case was dismissed
Federal officials failed to secure the new indictment against James, whom Trump has targeted, after a judge said the previous one was secured by an unlawfully appointed prosecutor.
Multiple sources.
Revenge tour going as well as 2020 election cases.
Interesting nugget of information in the NBC News story:
So the Prez doesn’t know the difference between sending a secure private e-mail to the Attorney General, and posting on Truth Social.
I’m surprised. This is my surprised face 
It certainly provides support for a defence of politically motivated prosecution.
Well, this is the same guy that tried to declassify things the same way Michael Scott tried to declare bankruptcy.
At least he hasn’t appointed Michael Scott to the Cabinet. Yet.
Michael Scott is a Democrat so that would be weird.
He was recently amazed and angry that a Democrat he pardoned didn’t immediately switch political parties so…maybe not so weird.