A federal appeals court has upheld the disqualification of Alina Habba as acting U.S. attorney for New Jersey. The ruling, issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, was unanimous and came against the backdrop of legal challenges to her appointment by three individuals facing criminal charges.
Background on Alina Habba’s Appointment
In March 2025, Alina Habba was appointed as interim U.S. attorney in New Jersey. Her role was limited to 120 days, pending Senate confirmation or a district court extension. However, her confirmation was deemed unlikely due to opposition from New Jersey senators Cory Booker and Andrew Kim.
Legal Challenges and Court Ruling
U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann ruled in August that Habba’s appointment violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA). He noted that she had been serving without lawful authority since her appointment in July. The Justice Department appealed this decision, leading to the 3rd Circuit’s involvement.
Third Circuit Findings
The appeals court determined that allowing Habba to serve could undermine the FVRA’s intent. Judge Michael Fisher emphasized that the Trump administration’s approach would enable individuals to bypass the constitutional requirement for presidential appointments and Senate confirmations, creating a loophole for indefinite service in federal positions.
Subsequent Actions by the Trump Administration
- Habba’s nomination for U.S. attorney was withdrawn before the 120-day limit.
- She resigned as interim U.S. attorney.
- Habba was then appointed as “special attorney” and given the role of first assistant U.S. attorney.
- With the position vacant, she was elevated to acting U.S. attorney under the FVRA.
Broader Implications
The decision by the 3rd Circuit has broader implications, as similar maneuvers have been employed by the Trump administration in other states. In Nevada and Los Angeles, similar efforts to appoint temporary U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation have faced legal scrutiny.
The ruling serves as a significant precedent, reinforcing the necessity for lawful appointments within the U.S. attorney system. This outcome contributes to ongoing debates about presidential authority and the proper mechanisms for filling federal positions across the government.
