Judge Jesse M. Furman Lets Maurene Comey Lawsuit Proceed in Federal Court

A federal judge in New York ruled Tuesday that fired prosecutor Maurene Comey’s lawsuit can proceed in federal court, rejecting the Justice Department’s argument that her wrongful-termination complaint should be moved to an administrative panel.

“Judge blocks DOJ's attempt to move Maurene Comey's wrongful termination suit out of court The longtime prosecutor is the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey”

ABC News

Judge Jesse M. Furman rejected the government’s bid to route the dispute through the Merit Systems Protection Board, and he said the sole reason given for her firing last year was “Article II of the U.S. Constitution, which ‘vest[s]’ ‘executive power’ in the president.”

ABC News

Furman said that reason takes her case outside the process that channels many, if not most, categories of disputes between federal employers and employees to avenues of administrative and judicial review outside of district courts, according to the AP account.

The AP reported that Furman set a May 28 hearing for an initial pretrial conference in the civil case.

The decision came as Maurene Comey’s father, former FBI Director James Comey, was indicted again in an investigation over a social media photo of seashells arranged on a beach that officials said constituted a threat against Trump, the AP said.

In a statement, Maurene Comey’s lawyers said they were “thrilled” because their client’s “lawless, unconstitutional termination” belongs in a federal court where questions about the constitutional separation of powers are commonly litigated, according to the AP.

The Justice Department did not immediately comment, the AP reported.

Multiple outlets described the mechanism of Maurene Comey’s termination as a notice that cited constitutional authority rather than a civil-service process.

The AP said Furman noted that “the sole reason provided for Maurene Comey’s firing last year was Article II of the U.S. Constitution,” and it described the judge’s view that this placed her case outside the administrative channels.

Associated Press

ABC News similarly reported that Furman decided the case belongs with him because Comey was fired pursuant to the president’s executive authority and not the usual procedures for civil servants, and it quoted the judge’s language that “Comey was notified by email from Department of Justice officials in Washington, D.C., that her employment was terminated, effective immediately.”

ABC News also quoted the reason given for her removal: “She was given one and only one reason for her removal: Article II of the U.S. Constitution, which 'vest[s]' the 'executive Power' in the President.”

CBS News added detail from court papers about the internal response to her firing, reporting that Comey asked interim U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton about the basis for her firing and he told her, “All I can say is it came from Washington. I can't tell you anything else,” according to court papers.

CBS News also described the termination memo’s language, stating that “Pursuant to Article II of the United States Constitution and the laws of the United States, your employment with the Department of Justice is hereby terminated, and you are removed from federal service effective immediately,” the memo stated.

In the same CBS account, Furman’s reasoning emphasized that defendants’ reliance on the Constitution rather than civil-service removal provisions placed her case outside what Congress intended for the MSPB.

The judge’s ruling centered on jurisdiction and the relationship between the Constitution and the Civil Service Reform Act framework that governs many federal employment disputes.

“Maurene Comey Former federal prosecutorMaurene Comeycan proceed with a lawsuit claiming she was wrongfully fired because of PresidentDonald Trump’s political feud with her father, former FBI directorJames Comey, a judge ruled”

Bloomberg

The Hill reported that Furman said her case “falls outside the universe” of cases Congress meant for the Merit Systems Protection Board to resolve, and it described the ruling as coming over the Justice Department’s objection.

The New Republic’s account said Furman rejected the government’s motion to dismiss and wrote that “Comey’s case does not fall within the purview of the CSRA’s scheme because she was fired pursuant to Article II of the Constitution, not pursuant to the CSRA itself.”

Politico quoted Furman’s language that “The Court finds that Comey’s claims are not of the type Congress intended to be reviewed within that scheme because it would deprive her of meaningful judicial review, her claims are wholly collateral to the CSRA’s review provisions, and her claims — which raise fundamental constitutional questions — fall outside of the MSPB’s traditional expertise.”

CBS News similarly quoted Furman’s view that defendants’ “sole reliance on the Constitution — rather than the removal provisions of the [Civil Service Reform Act] — places Comey's case outside the universe of cases that Congress intended the MSPB to resolve.”

The AP reported that during oral arguments in December, Furman refused to let Comey immediately gather evidence to learn who ordered her firing and how it transpired, saying the government had made serious arguments that her firing must first be considered by the federal Merit Systems Protection Board.

The AP also reported that Furman set a May 28 hearing for an initial pretrial conference in the civil case.

Comey’s lawsuit alleges that her termination was tied to her father and to political animus, and the outlets describe how her prosecution record and her family connection shaped the narrative in court.

The AP said Maurene Comey sued after her summer firing—soon after she led the prosecution of Sean “Diddy” Combs and won a conviction on prostitution-related charges—contending that she was improperly removed solely or substantially because of who her father is or because of her perceived political affiliation or beliefs, Furman said.

MS NOW

The AP also reported that Furman wrote that Comey “was, by all accounts, an exemplary Assistant United States Attorney” and that in nearly a decade as a prosecutor she “was assigned some of the country’s highest profile cases, and she consistently received the highest accolades from supervisors and peers alike.”

The Hill described her as a former federal prosecutor and said she alleged the Trump administration fired her for political reasons, and it reported that she sued in September over her July dismissal from her role as a prosecutor in the Southern District of New York.

ABC News said Comey alleged she was fired “because her father is former FBI Director James B. Comey, or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both,” and it listed high-profile defendants she prosecuted, including Sean Combs, Robert Hadden, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

CBS News reported that Comey served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York for nearly a decade and worked on high-profile cases including those involving convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, Sean “Diddy” Combs and Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey.

The Hill also reported that when Maurene Comey was fired, she wrote in a letter to her colleagues that “fear is the tool of a tyrant, wielded to suppress independent thought.”

The Justice Department argued that the case should be handled through the Merit Systems Protection Board, and multiple outlets described that position as an effort to keep the dispute within an executive-branch channel for federal worker complaints.

“Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey and a former federal prosecutor, may proceed with her lawsuit alleging the Justice Department’s decision to fire her last year was politically motivated, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday”

MS NOW

The AP said Judge Furman rejected an argument by the Justice Department that Comey’s complaint about her dismissal last year should be moved out of court and handled instead by an administrative panel.

The Hill

ABC News reported that the Justice Department argued her case belongs before the Merit Systems Protection Board and not in federal district court, and it quoted government attorneys describing the issue as routine, saying “A federal employee's claims that removal from federal service was arbitrary and capricious or conducted in a manner that did not provide the process to which they contend they were due is not a novel issue.”

UPI described the Justice Department lawyers’ claim that Comey’s case had to go before the Merit Systems Protection Board rather than federal court, and it said Furman ruled that this is not the sort of case that would fall under the board.

Politico and the AP both reported that Furman’s ruling was a significant victory for Comey, and Politico quoted her lawyer’s reaction.

Politico reported that a lawyer for Comey, Ellen Blain, said Tuesday that “we are thrilled” with Furman’s decision, and it quoted her saying, “No president can ignore the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and federal law and fire a career federal employee based solely on her last name.”

Several outlets also said the Justice Department did not comment, including the AP and Politico, with Politico stating “A spokesperson for DOJ declined to comment.”

The ruling sits within a wider set of legal and political developments involving James Comey and the Trump administration, and outlets connected those threads to the context of the firing dispute.

The AP reported that Furman’s ruling came the same day that Maurene Comey’s father was indicted again, this time in an investigation over a social media photo of seashells arranged on a beach that officials said constituted a threat against Trump.

The AP also said the new prosecution against James Comey came months after a separate and unrelated indictment was dismissed, and it noted that Trump fired him in 2017.

The Hill described James Comey as a longtime Trump foe and said his firing as FBI director in 2017 became a focal point of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into whether Trump sought to obstruct the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The Hill also reported that the Trump administration has appealed, referring to the dismissal of charges against James Comey that stemmed from 2020 testimony he gave Congress concerning leaks at the FBI, and it said those charges were dismissed over the unlawful appointment of the prosecutor who pursued them.

UPI added that Comey was a former Manhattan federal prosecutor who was abruptly fired without explanation in July and that she had served in the role for nearly 10 years, dealing with cases such as those against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Across the coverage, the judge’s decision to keep the case in federal court is portrayed as a procedural turning point that allows Maurene Comey’s constitutional claims to be litigated while other cases involving her father continue to move forward.