Judge allows fired Maurene Comey's wrongful termination suit
The daughter of former FBI Director James Comey says she was fired as a federal prosecutor over her perceived political affiliation. Now her wrongful termination lawsuit can proceed in federal court.
Menu
Front Page Breaking News Comments Flagged Comments Recently Flagged User Blogs Write a Blog Entry Create a Poll Edit Account Weekly Digest Stats Page RSS Feed Back Page
Subscriptions
Read the Retort using RSS.
RSS Feed
Author Info
LampLighter
Joined 2013/04/13Visited 2026/04/29
Status: user
MORE STORIES
Blanche's bid to join elite Washington club hits resistance (2 comments) ...
Judge allows fired Maurene Comey's wrongful termination suit (4 comments) ...
Putin pledges support 4 Iran in talks with Iran FM Araghchi (1 comments) ...
Hidden Phenomenon Could Explain Why Buildings Feel Haunted (4 comments) ...
OpEd: The Trouble with Trump's Bunker and Ballroom (5 comments) ...
Alternate links: Google News | Twitter
Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.
More from th article ...
... A federal judge on Tuesday advanced former Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey's lawsuit against the Trump administration, in which she claims she was fired only because her father is outspoken Trump critic and former FBI Director James Comey. The Trump administration sought to dismiss Comey's complaint, asserting the dispute should be handled through administrative proceedings by the Merit Systems Protection Board, an executive branch agency created by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. However, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled Tuesday that Comey's suit was properly filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. "The court concludes that Comey's case does not fall within the purview of the CSRA's scheme because she was fired pursuant to Article II of the Constitution, not pursuant to the CSRA itself," he wrote in a 27-page opinion, referring to the president's executive power vested under Article II of the U.S. Constitution. "Defendants' sole reliance on the Constitution -- rather than the removal provisions of the CSRA -- places Comey's case outside the universe of cases that Congress intended the MSPB to resolve," the judge wrote. In a footnote to the ruling, Furman opined that whether the U.S. government could properly rely on the Constitution to fire Comey "is the merits question at the heart of this case -- and thus a question for another day." ...
The Trump administration sought to dismiss Comey's complaint, asserting the dispute should be handled through administrative proceedings by the Merit Systems Protection Board, an executive branch agency created by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
However, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled Tuesday that Comey's suit was properly filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
"The court concludes that Comey's case does not fall within the purview of the CSRA's scheme because she was fired pursuant to Article II of the Constitution, not pursuant to the CSRA itself," he wrote in a 27-page opinion, referring to the president's executive power vested under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
"Defendants' sole reliance on the Constitution -- rather than the removal provisions of the CSRA -- places Comey's case outside the universe of cases that Congress intended the MSPB to resolve," the judge wrote.
In a footnote to the ruling, Furman opined that whether the U.S. government could properly rely on the Constitution to fire Comey "is the merits question at the heart of this case -- and thus a question for another day." ...
#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-04-28 09:33 PM | Reply
Fuck Pedo Donnie
#2 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-04-28 10:36 PM | Reply
Frickin' journalists' and their editors. Just say what happened and avoid the bs.
No, the judge did not allow Comey to bring her suit. She done done that and it don't take a judge to do it. What happened is the court denied the government's motion to dismiss. A routine happening that means the case continues forward as would have happened without the motion to dismiss.
That and just another, becoming routine, Buffoon DOJ crash and burn. Read the article for their dumba**ery.
#3 | Posted by et_al at 2026-04-29 12:11 AM | Reply
Discovery on this one could be entertaining.
#4 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-04-29 05:31 AM | Reply
Post a comment The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed. Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it. Username: Password: Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy
The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.
Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy