Federal judge rules Trump DOJ unlawfully fired prosecutor Maurene Comey, orders back pay one week before Election Day

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Justice Department under President Trump unlawfully fired Maurene Comey, an assistant U.S. attorney in Manhattan and the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, and ordered the government to pay her retroactively for the months she lost. U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman of the Southern District of New York issued a 55-page decision finding that Comey's July 16, 2025 termination "indisputably violated the CSRA," the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, along with the constitutional separation of powers, the Administrative Procedure Act and her Fifth Amendment due process rights. The judge ordered retroactive reinstatement and back pay from the July 2025 firing date through December 20, 2025, the date Comey accepted a partner position at the law firm Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, "to make her whole"; she is not required to return to the department. The ruling lands one week before the 2026 midterm elections, according to meadowlakeNOW, which carried the Associated Press wire report.

What happened

Comey, an assistant U.S. attorney since 2015, worked on the prosecutions of Ghislaine Maxwell, Sean "Diddy" Combs and former Senator Robert Menendez. She sued after her dismissal, alleging she was fired because she is the daughter of James Comey, whom Trump removed as FBI director in May 2017 and has repeatedly called to be jailed.

Furman rejected the Justice Department's claim that federal prosecutors exercise the president's "conclusive and preclusive" powers and can therefore be removed without cause, writing that the government's theory "flies in the face of nearly two centuries of Supreme Court precedent." The judge did not find that Trump personally ordered the firing, and did not find that retaliation was proven. His ruling rested on the administration's failure to follow federal removal procedures. Comey's First Amendment claim was reserved, with the judge inclined to dismiss it as largely moot, per the meadowlakeNOW report.

The ruling arrives amid a broader pattern of Justice Department firings of career employees and pending criminal matters involving James Comey. A lie-to-Congress case against him was dismissed over the prosecutor's illegal appointment, and a separate indictment, which references an "86 47" seashell post, remains pending; he has pleaded not guilty.

Why it matters

The decision tests the limits of presidential control over the federal workforce. Furman's holding that even federal prosecutors, who serve at the core of the executive branch's law enforcement function, are protected by civil service removal procedures is a direct constraint on the administration's personnel strategy. The remedy is concrete: back pay and retirement benefits covering roughly five months of employment, a monetary award that gives the ruling practical force rather than symbolic weight.

The timing sharpens the political stakes. With the midterms one week away, the ruling feeds an ongoing argument about the Justice Department's independence. Comey's lawyers, Ellen Blain, Nicole Gueron, Deepa Vanamali and Margaret Donovan, said in a statement: "This hard-earned victory belongs to Ms. Comey, to all civil servants, and to all fighting for the rule of law... the President is not above the law." The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment, so its position on whether to appeal or comply is not yet known. As Trending Politics framed it, the department was "dealt a major blow" over the firing.

How it is being covered

Ground.news counts 96 sources carrying the story, split 36 percent left-leaning, 54 percent centrist and 10 percent right-leaning, with 81 of 88 factuality-rated sources in the high or very high tiers. The blindspot sits on the right, where only a small share of outlets are covering the ruling; conservative commentators such as Nick Sortor on X have called Furman an "Obama judge" and demanded an appeal, a line of response that right-leaning coverage emphasizes while much centrist and left coverage centers the court's reasoning.

What to watch

Three things will shape the story's next chapter. First, whether the Justice Department appeals, and if so, whether it seeks a stay of the reinstatement and back pay order pending review. Second, whether the ruling's reasoning travels: other fired career employees have pending claims, and Furman's separation-of-powers analysis could be cited in those cases. Third, the political aftermath after Election Day, since the ruling's proximity to the vote invites both parties to use it in closing arguments about the Justice Department's independence.

By the numbers

Source snapshot