USA21 July, 20262 min read
Roger Rogoff Sues Trump Administration After Trump Fires Him in Seattle
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
Rogoff filed federal lawsuit claiming Trump's removal violated the appointments clause. Fired 54 minutes after being sworn in.
Rogoff sues after firing
Roger Rogoff, the U.S. attorney appointed for the Western District of Washington by a unanimous panel of federal judges, sued the Trump administration after President Donald Trump fired him less than an hour after he was sworn in last week.
“District court judges can appoint a temporary U.S. Attorney, and POTUS can fire them.”
Rogoff’s lawsuit asks a federal judge to declare the firing “unlawful” and allow him to resume his assignment until a permanent successor is named through presidential nomination and Senate confirmation.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said on X that “District court judges can appoint a temporary U.S. Attorney, and POTUS can fire them,” while the Justice Department spokesperson argued the district court “did not coordinate with DOJ on this selection.”
The case centers on the vacancy timeline in Seattle, where the Western District of Washington had not had a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney in place since mid-2023, and where the district court’s judges appointed Rogoff after the vacancy persisted for months.
Arguments over law and process
Rogoff’s lawyers argued that the firing violated federal law and the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, warning that the administration’s approach would let the Executive Branch “evade the Senate's advice-and-consent role indefinitely.” In a statement, Rogoff said, “The President's actions violate the law, and they ignore the protections of the Constitution of the United States,” after the Executive Office of the President emailed him that he had been removed.
The Justice Department’s position, as described in the reporting, was that “The district court did not coordinate with DOJ on this selection,” and that the firing was “wholly within the President’s authority.” Rogoff’s complaint also contends that the president cannot “rewrite the law to require the president’s approval of the district court’s selection,” and it seeks an order declaring he remains U.S. attorney until the president nominates and the Senate confirms a replacement.
National implications for prosecutions
The lawsuit frames the dispute as having immediate consequences for the Western District of Washington’s ability to prosecute federal crimes, with Rogoff’s filing saying “The people of the Western District of Washington have no validly appointed U.S. attorney to prosecute federal crimes.” Rogoff’s request includes a preliminary injunction to install him as the U.S. attorney in Western Washington despite Trump’s decision to terminate him, while the complaint alleges the firing caused “immediate, severe, and irreparable harm.”
The reporting also ties the case to a broader pattern of court-versus-executive conflict, including the Northern Virginia episode in which a judge dismissed cases brought by then-acting U.S. attorney Lindsey Halligan against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey. In the same vein, the Seattle Times reported that Trump appointed Charles Neil Floyd as interim U.S. attorney last October and later named him “first assistant” to run the office, but that Floyd was never formally nominated or brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee.