Appeals Court Upholds Disqualification of Alina Habba as New Jersey's Top Federal Prosecutor

Appeals Court Affirms Disqualification

A federal appeals court on Monday, December 1, 2025, upheld a lower court's decision to disqualify Alina Habba, former personal attorney to President Donald Trump, from serving as the acting U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, based in Philadelphia, found that Habba was not lawfully appointed to the position and was exercising its functions unlawfully.

Contested Appointment and Administrative Maneuvers

Habba was initially appointed as interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey in March 2025. Federal law, specifically the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA), limits such temporary appointments to 120 days unless the nominee receives Senate confirmation or the term is extended by district judges. New Jersey's two Democratic senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, had expressed opposition to her nomination, making Senate confirmation unlikely.

When Habba's interim term expired in July 2025, a panel of federal judges in New Jersey declined to retain her, instead appointing her first assistant, Desiree Leigh Grace, to the position. However, Attorney General Pam Bondi subsequently fired Grace. Through a series of administrative actions, including withdrawing Habba's nomination for U.S. Attorney and then appointing her as the first assistant, the administration effectively re-installed Habba as acting U.S. Attorney. The appeals court panel deemed these maneuvers illegal and an attempt to circumvent established vacancy laws and the Senate confirmation process.

Legal Basis for the Ruling

The appeals court's decision affirmed an August 2025 ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann of the Middle District of Pennsylvania, who had concluded that Habba was serving 'without lawful authority' since early July and 'must be disqualified from participating in any ongoing cases.' The challenges to Habba's authority originated from criminal defendants in New Jersey who argued she lacked the legal standing to prosecute their cases.

Circuit Judge Michael Fisher, a George W. Bush appointee, authored the panel's opinion. He noted that 'It is apparent that the current administration has been frustrated by some of the legal and political barriers to getting its appointees in place.' The court emphasized that the FVRA's exclusivity provision prohibits the Attorney General's delegation of all powers of a U.S. Attorney to an individual like Habba, who was also barred from the acting role due to her prior nomination for the vacant U.S. Attorney position.

Broader Implications and Future Outlook

This ruling marks the first time an appellate court has weighed in on the Trump administration's strategy of appointing U.S. Attorneys without Senate confirmation, dealing a significant blow to such efforts. The issue of unlawfully appointed federal prosecutors is not isolated to New Jersey, with similar challenges pending in other districts across the country. Legal experts suggest that the Supreme Court could ultimately have the final say on this matter, given the differing interpretations of appointment processes.

Habba had previously made public statements indicating a political agenda for the traditionally nonpartisan role, stating her hope to 'turn New Jersey red,' which drew criticism and further scrutiny of her appointment.