A federal judge is set to hear arguments Friday as lawyers for former FBI Director James Comey seek to block the Justice Department from pursuing its third criminal case against him in 13 months. The case centers on allegations that Comey, while FBI director in October 2016, authorized the disclosure of classified information to a New York Times reporter regarding a report on Yahoo’s compliance with a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order. Prosecutors filed a criminal information—a charging document that does not require grand jury approval—on October 5, the 10-year anniversary of the original New York Times report.
The filing bypassed a grand jury, a move the Justice Department described as an effort to preserve its case before the statute of limitations expired. Comey’s legal team has called the prosecution legally invalid, arguing the 10-year limit has already passed and that prior investigations by two U.S. attorneys’ offices declined to pursue charges. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, will preside over Friday’s hearing.
Core allegations and legal maneuvers
The latest case alleges Comey violated the Espionage Act by transmitting national defense information to an unauthorized recipient in connection with the 2016 leak. The Justice Department has not yet secured a grand jury indictment, instead filing the criminal information under seal on October 5, the same day the statute of limitations would have expired. Comey’s defense has moved to dismiss the case, stating in court filings that the allegations were “investigated twice and declined for prosecution.” The government agreed not to seek an indictment for 30 days following an emergency hearing earlier this month.
This is the third federal case brought against Comey since September 2025. The first case, filed in Virginia, accused Comey of lying to Congress in 2020 but was dismissed after a judge ruled the prosecutor was unlawfully appointed. A second case, still pending, stems from an Instagram photo of seashells arranged to spell “8647,” which prosecutors claimed was a coded threat against former President Donald Trump. Comey’s team has argued the arrangement was a reference to restaurant slang, and a federal judge has delayed the trial until 2027.
Political and legal context
Comey’s prosecution follows his firing by Trump in May 2017, amid his oversight of the FBI’s investigation into potential collusion between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia. The two have since engaged in a public feud, with Comey comparing Trump to a “corrupt mafia don” in a published book and Trump calling for his imprisonment on charges of treason. The latest case has drawn scrutiny as it coincides with the midterm elections, raising questions about the timing and motivations behind the prosecution.
Comey has denied all allegations, stating in a post-filing response that he “steadfastly maintains his innocence.” His legal team has also argued that the criminal information “does not meet the express statutory requirements” for extending the statute of limitations. The Justice Department has not publicly detailed its rationale beyond preserving the case before the deadline.
Background on prior investigations
The alleged leak to the New York Times in October 2016 involved a report on Yahoo’s cooperation with a secret FISA Court order. Two separate U.S. attorneys’ offices reviewed the matter and declined to prosecute, according to Comey’s legal filings. The latest case marks the first time prosecutors have pursued charges despite these prior determinations. The use of a criminal information—a procedural tool typically reserved for cases where a defendant is expected to plead guilty—has drawn criticism from legal experts as an unusual maneuver in a high-profile prosecution.