Justice Department Challenges Court Order in Comey Case

Wed Dec 10 2025 05:29:59 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

The Justice Department has filed an appeal against a court ruling that restricts its access to vital evidence in the investigation of former FBI Director James Comey.

The U.S. Justice Department is contesting a federal judge's order which temporarily prevents them from accessing computer files belonging to Daniel Richman, a key figure in the investigation of former FBI Director James Comey. Prosecutors argue that this injunction hampers their ability to build a case against Comey, who has faced allegations of misleading Congress regarding media leaks. The conflict arises from claims made by Richman, who has requested the return of his files, citing excessive government retention of information post-investigation.

In a significant legal development, the U.S. Justice Department has challenged a court order that imposes limits on its efforts to pursue a new indictment against former FBI Director James Comey. This court order restricts access to crucial evidence located on the computers of Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University and close friend of Comey. Richman has been identified as a pivotal figure in the ongoing investigation into actions taken by Comey during the FBI's inquiry into Hillary Clinton's private email server.

Prosecutors argue that the injunction, issued by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, effectively obstructs their ability to investigate potential misconduct and to prosecute Comey. They assert that Richman's request to recover his files is a strategic move aimed at hindering the investigation, characterizing the judge's ruling as an overreach.

The Justice Department maintains that Comey had used Richman to leak information to the media concerning key decisions made during the FBI's inquiry into Clinton's email practices. Earlier this year, in September, Comey faced charges of making false statements to Congress regarding whether he authorized Richman to act as an anonymous source.

This is not the first complication in the legal proceedings concerning Comey. A previous indictment against him was dismissed when a federal judge in Virginia determined that the prosecutor had been improperly appointed. However, this ruling left the door open for the Justice Department to pursue further charges against Comey, who has consistently denied any wrongdoing and has accused the Justice Department of engaging in a politically motivated prosecution.

Furthermore, Richman's legal representatives argue that the retention of equipment and files, which were obtained via prior search warrants, should not persist, especially since the investigation has concluded without charges being brought against him. They emphasize that the information contained on Richman's devices is privileged and should not be used against him or Comey.

Following a hearing, Judge Kollar-Kotelly granted Richman's request for the return of his files, but allowed for further submissions from both parties before making a final decision. While the Justice Department contends that the judge's order must be lifted to avoid interfering with ongoing federal criminal enforcement, the administration is preparing to fight this ruling in court.