A federal judge on Thursday ordered the reinstatement of Roger Rogoff as U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington, ruling that President Donald Trump lacked the authority to fire him after Rogoff was appointed by a panel of federal judges.
U.S. District Judge Stanley Bastian granted a preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to restore Rogoff’s access to office resources and barred the Justice Department from replacing him while legal challenges proceed. The ruling marks the latest escalation in a broader dispute over the administration’s efforts to install U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation.
Core developments
- Rogoff was appointed by the 17 active and senior judges of the Western District of Washington on July 15, 2026, following a vacancy left by the absence of a Senate-confirmed nominee.
- Trump fired Rogoff less than an hour after his appointment, prompting Rogoff to file a lawsuit challenging the termination.
Judge’s ruling and rationale
Judge Bastian, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, ruled from the bench that Rogoff’s appointment was lawful under federal statute, which permits district court judges to name a U.S. attorney when the position remains unfilled by a Senate-confirmed nominee. The judge emphasized that the law does not authorize the president to unilaterally remove such appointees.
"The real issue to be decided in this case by this court appears to be one of first impression: can the president fire a U.S. attorney appointed by the district court?" Bastian said. "The answer to the question the court is faced with is no."
Bastian also declared that Charles Neil Floyd, the first assistant who had been leading the office under acting authority, was not the rightful U.S. attorney and that the president’s directive to Floyd was improper.
Justice Department response
The Justice Department issued a statement saying it disagrees with the decision and plans to appeal, seeking an immediate stay to halt the reinstatement. A spokesperson for the department stated, "We disagree with the decision and intend to seek an immediate stay and will appeal."
Rogoff, a former judge and veteran prosecutor, said in a statement that he was gratified by the court’s recognition of the constitutional framework governing U.S. attorney appointments. "Now I need to get to work," he added.
Background and legal context
Federal law allows district court judges to appoint U.S. attorneys on a temporary basis when the position remains vacant without a Senate-confirmed nominee. Rogoff’s appointment followed a pattern of judicial appointments in multiple districts where the Trump administration had sought to install attorneys without confirmation.
Rogoff is the first judicially appointed U.S. attorney to sue over such a removal, setting up a direct legal confrontation over the scope of presidential authority versus judicial appointment powers. Similar cases in other districts have resulted in rulings against the administration’s efforts to extend or replace temporary appointees without judicial or congressional approval.
Ongoing implications
The ruling underscores a growing legal and institutional conflict over the balance of power between the executive branch and the judiciary in the appointment and removal of U.S. attorneys. The Justice Department’s appeal will test the durability of Bastian’s interpretation and could influence future appointments in districts where vacancies persist.
The Western District of Washington covers a jurisdiction that includes Seattle and surrounding areas, making the position a key role in federal law enforcement and prosecution in the region.