Marketdash
Back to News

Federal Judge Orders Justice Department to Return Seized Data, Citing Constitutional Violations in Comey Case

MarketDash Editorial Team
7 hours ago
A federal judge sharply criticized the Justice Department for violating constitutional rights by mishandling data seized from a close associate of former FBI Director James Comey, ordering the government to return the material.

A federal judge handed down a stinging rebuke to the Justice Department on Friday, ordering prosecutors to return data seized from a close friend of former FBI Director James Comey. The ruling sharply criticized the government's handling of the material in what has become an increasingly tangled legal case.

Fourth Amendment Violation Found

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that the government violated the constitutional rights of law professor Daniel Richman by keeping and using his emails and hard drive image without obtaining a proper warrant, according to NBC News.

In a detailed 46-page memorandum, Kollar-Kotelly wrote: "When the Government violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures … what remedy is available to the victim of the Government's unlawful intrusion? Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g) provides one such remedy."

Using Old Data for New Charges

Here's where things get interesting. The data was originally grabbed back in 2017 during an investigation into Comey following his firing. Fast forward several years, and prosecutors decided to dust off that old material to pursue a fresh indictment after an earlier case got tossed out due to the unlawful appointment of attorney Lindsey Halligan.

The judge didn't mince words about this approach. She called the Justice Department's handling of Richman's files a "remarkable breach of protocol" and accused the agency of acting with "callous disregard" for his constitutional rights.

More Legal Troubles for the Comey Case

The problems don't stop there. Last month, a different judge questioned whether the grand jury indictment against Comey was even valid, raising the possibility the entire case could get dismissed before trial. Prosecutors acknowledged that the final indictment had never actually been presented to the full grand jury, despite one proposed count having been rejected.

Adding another layer to this saga, Trump attorney Michael Cohen accused Comey of criminal conduct during a September MSNBC interview. Cohen claimed an investigation he conducted with reporter Brian Karem revealed Comey's involvement in the Russia investigation, suggesting the Department of Justice likely possessed communications that could support charges.

Comey has pleaded not guilty to charges of making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation. His trial is currently scheduled for January in Alexandria, Virginia, though given the mounting legal complications, it remains to be seen whether it will proceed as planned.

Back to News

Federal Judge Orders Justice Department to Return Seized Data, Citing Constitutional Violations in Comey Case

MarketDash Editorial Team
7 hours ago
A federal judge sharply criticized the Justice Department for violating constitutional rights by mishandling data seized from a close associate of former FBI Director James Comey, ordering the government to return the material.

A federal judge handed down a stinging rebuke to the Justice Department on Friday, ordering prosecutors to return data seized from a close friend of former FBI Director James Comey. The ruling sharply criticized the government's handling of the material in what has become an increasingly tangled legal case.

Fourth Amendment Violation Found

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that the government violated the constitutional rights of law professor Daniel Richman by keeping and using his emails and hard drive image without obtaining a proper warrant, according to NBC News.

In a detailed 46-page memorandum, Kollar-Kotelly wrote: "When the Government violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures … what remedy is available to the victim of the Government's unlawful intrusion? Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g) provides one such remedy."

Using Old Data for New Charges

Here's where things get interesting. The data was originally grabbed back in 2017 during an investigation into Comey following his firing. Fast forward several years, and prosecutors decided to dust off that old material to pursue a fresh indictment after an earlier case got tossed out due to the unlawful appointment of attorney Lindsey Halligan.

The judge didn't mince words about this approach. She called the Justice Department's handling of Richman's files a "remarkable breach of protocol" and accused the agency of acting with "callous disregard" for his constitutional rights.

More Legal Troubles for the Comey Case

The problems don't stop there. Last month, a different judge questioned whether the grand jury indictment against Comey was even valid, raising the possibility the entire case could get dismissed before trial. Prosecutors acknowledged that the final indictment had never actually been presented to the full grand jury, despite one proposed count having been rejected.

Adding another layer to this saga, Trump attorney Michael Cohen accused Comey of criminal conduct during a September MSNBC interview. Cohen claimed an investigation he conducted with reporter Brian Karem revealed Comey's involvement in the Russia investigation, suggesting the Department of Justice likely possessed communications that could support charges.

Comey has pleaded not guilty to charges of making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation. His trial is currently scheduled for January in Alexandria, Virginia, though given the mounting legal complications, it remains to be seen whether it will proceed as planned.