In a deeply unusual and stinging rebuke to the Department of Justice, a federal grand jury has, for a second time, declined to re-indict New York Attorney General Letitia James on mortgage fraud charges.
This repeated failure marks a significant setback for the federal government’s determined push to prosecute one of President Donald Trump’s most outspoken political adversaries.
Rejection follows similar grand jury refusal
The latest grand jury rejection, confirmed on Thursday in Alexandria, Virginia, follows a similar refusal by a separate grand jury in Norfolk just last week.
The dual setbacks come after a federal judge dismissed the initial indictment against James and former FBI Director James Comey in November. That dismissal was due to a ruling that the prosecutor who secured those charges, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed as the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.
The initial charges, which stemmed from James’s 2020 purchase of a home in Norfolk, alleged that the Attorney General committed bank fraud and made false statements to a financial institution by claiming the property was a second home to secure a lower interest rate, when prosecutors contend it was used as a rental property. James has consistently denied any wrongdoing, labeling the entire case as politically motivated.
Evidence was apparently unconvincing to jurors
The conventional wisdom in the legal world is that grand juries almost always return an indictment requested by prosecutors.
The fact that two separate grand juries in two different cities have refused to find probable cause is an extraordinary event, suggesting the evidence presented by the Justice Department was fundamentally unconvincing to citizen jurors.
James’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, seized on the news, stating that the repeated rejections “makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day.” He characterized the effort as a “clear attempt to fulfill President Trump’s political vendetta,” noting that even career prosecutors reportedly resisted bringing the case originally.
Letitia James’ scores legal win over DOJ
The administration’s zealous pursuit of a case against James—who famously won a major civil fraud judgment against President Trump and his company—has been widely seen as an example of the use of federal power to target political opponents. Moreover, the failed attempts to revive the charges, despite the low bar required for an indictment, casts a long shadow over the integrity of the Justice Department’s process and its independence from political influence.
Furthermore, while there is no legal barrier preventing the Department of Justice from trying a third time, the unprecedented nature of two grand jury rejections in quick succession makes any further attempt highly problematic.
For now, the latest outcome serves as a powerful validation for James and a major defeat for the federal prosecutors who sought to resurrect the politically charged case.