What's Next in the Comey and Letitia James Trials?

Two high-profile opponents of former President Trump achieved significant court wins on Monday when a US judge threw out the federal indictments against them.

For weeks since their indictments, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James have maintained fiercely that they are not guilty, claiming that the administration and DOJ are simply targeting them for revenge.

US District Judge Cameron Currie tossed the charges in their cases due to prosecutor Lindsey Halligan's improper appointment as federal prosecutor. However, she left the door open for the federal authorities to try again.

• Court throws out cases against ex-FBI director Comey and New York AG James
• Federal judge states DOJ errors may have compromised Comey case
• What is ex-FBI director James Comey charged with?

Comey acknowledged that possibility after the decision, saying he thinks the former president is likely to come after him again.

And White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson appeared to agree: This isn't the final word on this issue.

But the government confronts steep obstacles to effectively try both after this setback, and legal analysts are reluctant to predict what could happen next due to the unprecedented circumstances of the cases.

It feels to me like uncharted territory, said Kay Levine, law professor at Emory University.

Could the justice department challenge the ruling?

The DOJ can contest the judge's decision before a federal appeals court. In this instance, that would be the Fourth Circuit Appeals Court.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi signaled she would take this route, pledging to use all available legal action, including an expedited appeal.

In other cases, the Trump administration has aggressively appealed adverse decisions, taking cases from trial courts and sometimes accelerating its petitions up to the US Supreme Court.

Attorney Abbe Lowell, James's lawyer, vowed to continue to challenge any additional politically motivated charges through all legal avenues.

In the event of an appeal, the justice department probably would have its own attorneys present the arguments, making Halligan's role in the appeals process unclear.

Is it possible there be new charges?

The government accused James Comey with making false statements to Congress and obstructing justice. Government lawyers indicted Letitia James with bank fraud and providing false information to a financial institution.

Each entered not guilty pleas. Besides claiming Halligan was unlawfully appointed, both also claimed to be victims of retaliatory legal action.

Since the initial charges were dismissed (although appeals might alter this), the DOJ might try to convene new grand juries and obtain new charges.

As far as everything I've seen, a new prosecutor could bring James' case to a new grand jury and secure a fresh indictment, said Professor Levine.

But legal expert John Day, head of the American College of Trial Lawyers, said it could be a complicated path – especially in Comey's case.

I can tell you it will be strongly disputed, whether Comey's case can be re-indicted if a properly assigned attorney is assigned and is can obtain an charge.

He described the complex web of lawyers, courts, and legal filings involved as a procedural morass with no simple answers.

It could be harder for the DOJ to try to file the identical accusations against James Comey.

A key issue is the statute of limitations – the deadline that prosecutors had to indict Comey for these particular claims – which expired at the end of September. Nonetheless, the dismissal of the charges would trigger a six-month grace period for the justice department to refile the case.

Still in that case, his lawyers said it plans to argue the government is out of time.

The decision further indicates that since the indictment is void, the time limit has expired and there can be no new indictment, lawyer Patrick Fitzgerald said on Monday.

What happens to prosecutor Lindsey Halligan?

In the pair of rulings on the charges against James and Comey, the judge was blunt: Halligan's appointment was improper.

Judge Currie wrote in the James decision that the AG's effort to install Halligan as Interim US Attorney for the Virginia Eastern District was invalid.

As a result, she lacked legal power to file the charges, she wrote.

Federal prosecutors are proposed by the president and need US Senate confirmation. Federal statutes govern how individuals can be assigned on a temporary basis, but the judge determined that Halligan's assignment had breached these regulations.

This makes Halligan's position on future cases against James and Comey, once more, uncertain.

The ruling also could cast a shadow on any other cases Halligan has brought in the Eastern District of Virginia where she works.

But Attorney General Bondi said on Monday that she made Halligan a special US attorney and commended her work as excellent.

The White House maintained its position that Halligan's appointment was legal, press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the press on Monday.