Judicial Appointment of U.S. Attorney in Albany Overturned by White House Termination Hours Later
ALBANY, N.Y. — A swift and unprecedented legal confrontation unfolded in the Northern District of New York on Wednesday, culminating in the termination of a newly appointed United States Attorney just hours after he was sworn into office by a panel of federal judges. The incident highlights a rare intersection of conflicting authorities between the Judicial and Executive branches regarding the leadership of federal law enforcement in the region.
The sequence of events began earlier in the day when federal judges in Albany moved to fill a vacancy in the top prosecutor’s office. Exercising a rarely invoked statutory authority, the district court judges appointed a new interim United States Attorney. Under federal law, specifically Title 28, Section 546 of the United States Code, district court judges are permitted to appoint a U.S. Attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled by a Presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed nominee. This legal mechanism is generally utilized to ensure the continuity of government and the effective administration of justice in districts where the position of the chief federal law enforcement officer has remained vacant for an extended period, specifically exceeding 120 days.
The judges’ decision to step in was intended to stabilize the leadership of the office, which handles the prosecution of federal crimes and represents the United States in civil litigation across a significant portion of upstate New York. By invoking this power, the court aimed to place an appointee in charge who was independent of the temporary “acting” status often utilized by the Department of Justice during transition periods.
However, the tenure of the judicially appointed prosecutor proved to be exceptionally brief. In a decisive move reasserting Executive control over the Department of Justice personnel, the White House terminated the appointee the same day. According to sources familiar with the matter, the dismissal was communicated through an email sent from the White House, effectively removing the prosecutor from the post almost immediately after his selection by the court.
The abrupt firing underscores the complex separation of powers inherent in the appointment of United States Attorneys. While these prosecutors are officers of the Executive Branch and serve at the pleasure of the President, the statutory provision allowing judges to make interim appointments creates a unique area of overlapping authority. Legal analysts note that while the court has the power to appoint in the absence of a confirmed nominee, the President retains the ultimate authority to remove executive officers.
The swift reversal has created a moment of administrative uncertainty for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Albany. The clash serves as a stark reminder of the distinct yet sometimes competing roles played by the federal judiciary and the White House in staffing the upper echelons of the federal justice system. As of Wednesday evening, the White House has not publicly detailed the specific reasons for the immediate termination, nor has a new timetable been released regarding a permanent nomination for the post. The office is expected to revert to interim leadership as the standard nomination process continues.
