Last month’s indictment of James Comey on charges of making false statements to Congress was the result of a yearslong relentless pressure campaign by President Donald Trump that shattered Justice Department norms and violated multiple laws and the former FBI director’s free speech rights, Comey’s attorneys argued Monday in a sweeping 51-page filing seeking dismissal of his case. 

Comey pleaded not guilty earlier this month to one count of false statements and one count of obstruction of a congressional proceeding related to his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020, amid what critics call Trump’s campaign of retribution against his perceived political foes. Vice President JD Vance has said any such prosecutions are “driven by law and not by politics.” 

Trump’s direct calls for his attorney general to act “NOW!!!” to prosecute Comey and other political enemies in a social media post last month was accompanied in the filing by an extensive detailing of statements dating back to 2017 in which Trump publicly called for Comey to be charged. 

The subsequent installation of White House aide and insurance lawyer Lindsey Halligan to bring the prosecution over the objections of career prosecutors “establishes an invidious and badfaith motivation” to the charges, Comey’s attorneys argued in the filing.  

“President Trump ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to prosecute Mr. Comey because of personal spite and because Mr. Comey has frequently criticized the President for his conduct in office,” the filing argued. “When no career prosecutor would carry out those orders, the President publicly forced the interim U.S. Attorney to resign and directed the Attorney General to effectuate ‘justice’ against Mr. Comey.  He then installed a White House aide with no prosecutorial experience as interim U.S. Attorney.  The President’s new hand-picked interim U.S. Attorney indicted Mr. Comey just days later — and days before the relevant statute of limitations was set to expire.” 

Comey’s attorneys asked U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff to dismiss the case “with prejudice,” which would bar the government from seeking to charge Comey again over his 2020 testimony to Congress — in order to set an example for other politically-motivated prosecutions sought by the Justice Department as well as preventing Comey from facing “a potential perpetual state of being vindictively prosecuted.” 

“Objective evidence establishes that President Trump directed the prosecution of Mr. Comey in retaliation for Mr. Comey’s public criticisms and to punish Mr. Comey because of personal spite,” Comey’s attorneys said. “Such a vindictive prosecution serves no legitimate government interest and contradicts fundamental constitutional values.”

“Bedrock principles of due process and equal protection have long ensured that government officials may not use courts to punish and imprison their perceived personal and political enemies.  But that is exactly what happened here,” said one of two motions filed by Comey’s attorneys Monday. “President Trump ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to prosecute Mr. Comey because of personal spite and because Mr. Comey has frequently criticized the President for his conduct in office.”  

Comey’s lawyers filed two separate motions to dismiss — one arguing the case against Comey was vindictive and another calling into question the legal authority of Halligan, the acting U.S. attorney who brought the charges.

The filing repeatedly cites a series of stories from ABC News that detailed the turmoil in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia in the days leading up to Comey’s indictment, including Trump’s move to oust U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert over his objections to bringing cases against the president’s enemies that career prosecutors had determined had no merit.

Also on Monday, Comey’s legal team responded to a court filing from federal prosecutors that suggested they may move to have Comey’s lead attorney Patrick Fitzgerald disqualified from the case, accusing the government’s attorneys of seeking to defame Fitzgerald by implying he engaged in criminal activity. 

In a court filing late Sunday night, prosecutors told Judge Michael Nachmanoff that Fitzgerald’s alleged involvement in providing information to the media for Comey after Comey was fired by President Donald Trump in 2017 could “inform a potential conflict and disqualification issue.” 

In their filing late Sunday, prosecutors accused Comey of using Fitzgerald as an intermediary in 2017 to “improperly disclose classified information” related to memos Comey shared recounting several of his interactions with President Trump. 

An investigation by the DOJ’s inspector general, however, found “no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the Memos to the media,” according to a report issued by IG Michael Horowitz.  

“There is no good faith basis for attributing criminal conduct to either Mr. Comey or his lead defense counsel,” Comey’s attorneys said Monday in their response. “Similarly, there is no good faith basis to claim a ‘conflict’ between Mr. Comey and his counsel, much less a basis to move to disqualify lead defense counsel.”

In their filing Monday, Comey’s attorneys further raised concerns about the government’s review of evidence that could be considered privileged communications between Comey and his lawyers, writing that it “appears … unlawful.” 

They have asked Judge Nachmanoff to deny a request by the DOJ to expedite a review of the evidence to determine which materials could be covered by privilege, writing that it’s important to give them ample time to respond to the motion “to avoid trampling on Mr. Comey’s legal privileges and to ensure that the government does not proceed with an unlawful review.”

Halligan was appointed by Trump as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia just four days before she went to a grand jury and sought Comey’s indictment over what sources say were the objections of career prosecutors.

The grand jury ultimately voted to indict Comey on two of three charges sought by Halligan related to Comey’s 2020 congressional testimony regarding the FBI’s Russia probe and whether Comey authorized leaks of anonymous information to the media. Comey has denied all charges.

While legal experts argue there’s an extraordinarily high bar for tossing a prosecution based on the argument of malicious prosecution, Comey’s case should be a unique test of the legal standard, given Trump’s ousting of the office’s senior prosecutor who resisted bringing charges and his public call on social media for Attorney General Pam Bondi to act “now” to prosecute Comey and other political enemies.