A grand jury on Thursday (Dec 11) declined to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James for the second time in a week, marking another major setback in the Justice Department’s efforts to prosecute President Donald Trump’s most prominent political opponents.
The repeated refusals are a striking rebuke to prosecutors’ attempts to revive a criminal case that Trump has publicly encouraged them to do.
Original charges fired
Initial charges against James and former FBI Director James Comey were dismissed in November after a judge ruled that Lindsey Halligan — a former Trump lawyer appointed as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia — was illegally appointed. The cases were dismissed without prejudice, allowing prosecutors to seek a new indictment.
Back-to-back grand jury failures
After a Norfolk grand jury declined to indict James last week, prosecutors went to another grand jury in Alexandria, Va., which also declined. The result was confirmed by two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity, AP reported. Prosecutors are still assessing the next procedure.
The defense calls the case a “stain” on the DOJ
James’ lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said the unprecedented second refusal showed the case “should never have seen the light of day”, calling the prosecution a blow to the department’s integrity and warning that any further attempts to revive it would “make a mockery” of the justice system.
Charges against James Lalitia
James was originally charged with bank fraud and making false statements related to the purchase of the home in 2020. Prosecutors alleged that she rented the property despite signing a “second home drive” requiring personal use for at least one year, allowing her to secure better loan terms designed for non-investment properties.
Political background and DOJ pressure
The indictment came shortly after Halligan was installed at the Justice Department amid intense pressure from the White House over allegations against Trump critics. Her appointment replaces veteran prosecutor Erik Siebert, who resigned after Trump publicly called for his removal.
The prosecution’s vindictive claim
James’ team says the case is retaliatory, targeting her because of years of investigations and civil lawsuits against Trump — including a major fraud case alleging he inflated his assets to get favorable loans. Although the penalty was later thrown out, both sides continue to appeal.
