Wednesday, December 3, 2025
In a few words:
Courts said no, but Trump's appointees are still acting like top prosecutors anyway. Strange?
More details:
🧩 Simple Version
A court said that two people, Alina Habba and Lindsey Halligan, who were put in charge of important government prosecutor jobs by President Trump, shouldn't be there. The court said their appointments weren't legal. Even though the court made this ruling, these two people and the government's main law office (the DOJ) are still saying they are in charge of these jobs. This is happening even though they don't have experience being prosecutors.
🚨 How Fox Would Spin It
"DEEP STATE COURTS ATTACKING PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PATRIOT APPOINTEES! " "Judges trying to stop strong leaders from cleaning up corruption. President Trump's loyal allies are being harassed just for doing their jobs and fighting for America First!"
✅ DeFoxed Reality Check
The courts are saying that Alina Habba and Lindsey Halligan were appointed to lead U.S. Attorney's offices in ways that broke federal laws. These laws are there to make sure important jobs like these get proper approval, often including a vote from the Senate. Even though judges ruled they are no longer legally in charge, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the appointees themselves are still acting as if they are. This seems to ignore the court's decisions. The article mentions that other Trump appointees have also had similar issues after courts ruled against their appointments.
💡 Why This Matters
When court rulings are ignored, it can weaken trust in the justice system. It raises questions about who is actually in charge of important legal decisions. Following proper appointment rules ensures fairness and prevents powerful jobs from being given out without proper checks and balances.
