the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Newark NJ — A constitutional crisis is unfolding in New Jersey after a Trump administration appointment for U.S. Attorney collided with federal judicial authority, sparking heated courtroom arguments and raising questions about separation of powers.
On August 15, Trump administration attorney Henry C. Whitaker blasted federal judges in New Jersey for rejecting the president’s nominee for U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey and instead ordering her deputy to assume the post. Whitaker called it an “atypical decision” and accused the judiciary of provoking a constitutional confrontation.
The Habba Appointment Controversy
At the center of the dispute is Alina Habba, Trump’s former personal attorney, who was named interim U.S. attorney in New Jersey earlier this year. By law, presidential appointees require Senate confirmation within 120 days. When that deadline passed without action, a panel of federal judges stepped in, as authorized by the Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007.
But instead of extending Habba’s tenure, the judges appointed her deputy, Desiree Leigh Grace, as acting U.S. attorney. In response, Trump administration officials swiftly fired Grace and reinstalled Habba, citing the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 as justification.
This legal tug-of-war triggered court challenges from defense attorneys, who argue that Habba’s authority is unconstitutional and undermines the integrity of federal prosecutions in New Jersey.
Courtroom Fireworks in Pennsylvania
The dispute reached U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, where attorneys debated precedent, statutory language, and constitutional principles in a marathon hearing. Judge Brann quipped that he was assigned the case “for my sins,” but acknowledged the seriousness of the gridlock.
“Are criminal prosecutions happening?” Brann asked.
“Not the way they normally would,” replied Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Coyne, confirming disruptions across New Jersey’s federal courts.
Some judges have refused to arraign defendants, adjourned trials, or even transferred cases to other jurisdictions while Habba’s authority remains unsettled.
Critics and Defenders Clash
Attorney Gerald Krovatin, representing defendants challenging Habba’s legitimacy, argued that Trump himself created the crisis by appointing someone unfit for the role. “Appointing someone who has no business being U.S. attorney … is the real constitutional violation,” Krovatin said.
On the other side, Whitaker defended the administration’s actions, insisting the president has the authority to remove court appointees and reappoint Habba under the vacancies law. “Ms. Habba is the person the president wishes to lead the office,” he stated.
What Happens Next
Judge Brann is expected to issue a ruling by August 21, though he acknowledged the outcome will likely be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
The decision could shape not only the future of New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor but also set a precedent in defining the boundaries between the executive branch and the judiciary over appointments.
For now, the uncertainty has left New Jersey’s legal system in limbo, with both sides bracing for a battle that could extend well beyond the Garden State.
Follow the Ridgewood blog has a brand-new new X account, we tweet good sh$t
https://twitter.com/TRBNJNews
https://truthsocial.com/@theridgewoodblog
https://mewe.com/jamesfoytlin.74/posts
#news #follow #media #trending #viral #newsupdate #currentaffairs #BergenCountyNews #NJBreakingNews #NJHeadlines #NJTopStories
