Former FBI Director James B. Comey, Jr. has filed a motion in U.S. District Court seeking to dismiss the recent criminal indictment against him. In the motion, filed on October 20, 2025, Comey’s legal team contends that the prosecution is unconstitutional, resulting from vindictive and selective enforcement driven by political motives.
Comey was indicted on two felony counts: making false statements to Congress and obstruction of a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation.
Claims of Improper Government Influence
The motion alleges that the charges were brought due to President Trump’s personal hostility toward Comey, who has been a vocal critic of the President’s conduct in office.
The defense claims that the prosecution violates Comey’s First Amendment right to free speech, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
Key events cited in the motion as evidence of improper motive include:
- Timing of Charges: The indictment was secured on September 25, 2025, just days before the five-year statute of limitations was set to expire on the alleged offenses.
- Replacement of U.S. Attorney: The motion alleges that former interim U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert was pressured to resign on September 19, 2025, after resisting calls to prosecute Comey. Less than a week later, Attorney General Pamela Bondi appointed Lindsey Halligan, a former White House aide and personal lawyer for President Trump with no prior prosecutorial experience, to the position of interim U.S. Attorney.
- Irregular Indictment Process: The defense notes that Ms. Halligan, on her fourth day in office, personally presented the case to the grand jury without the involvement of other career prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
- Presidential Statements: The motion quotes President Trump’s social media posts made immediately before and after the indictment, which demanded “JUSTICE” against Comey and thanked Ms. Halligan and FBI officials for their work in securing the indictment.
Selective Prosecution Argument
The defense also asserts that the prosecution is selective, arguing that Comey was targeted while other high-ranking officials faced no charges for similar alleged conduct.
The motion names several former Trump administration officials—including former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, and former Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin—who were accused of making misleading statements to the Senate but were not indicted.
The defense argues that the key distinguishing factor is that Comey has been an outspoken critic of the President, whereas the others were political allies.
The motion seeks the most severe remedy: dismissal of the indictment with prejudice, which would bar the government from bringing the charges again. Alternatively, the defense is asking the court to order discovery and hold an evidentiary hearing to examine the decision-making process behind the prosecution.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
