DOJ Flames Judiciary Over Impertinent Demand For Competent US Attorneys
Above the Law
by Liz DyeFebruary 13, 2026
AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has escalated its clash with the judiciary over the appointment of U.S. Attorneys, with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche leading the charge. The conflict centers on the DOJ’s frustration with judges who have been appointing interim prosecutors under 28 USC § 546(d), bypassing the traditional Senate confirmation process that is often blocked by the blue slip rule. This rule prevents President Trump from installing politically aligned attorneys in districts where his nominees face opposition, particularly in blue states. The DOJ has attempted to circumvent this by designating cronies as “special attorneys” or leaving them in roles as First Assistant U.S. Attorneys without official titles.
The situation came to a head in the Northern District of New York when Judge Lorna Schofield disqualified John Sarcone III, Trump’s acting U.S. Attorney, due to his lack of prosecutorial experience and questionable actions, such as fabricating details of an “attack” incident. In response, the court appointed Donald Kinsella, a highly experienced lawyer with decades of legal expertise, to lead the office. However, Blanche swiftly fired Kinsella, tweeting that judges do not have the authority to pick U.S. Attorneys, emphasizing Trump’s Article II constitutional powers.
This conflict highlights broader tensions between the executive and judicial branches over who controls prosecutorial roles. While Bondi and other DOJ officials argue that such judicial appointments threaten presidential authority, critics view this as an attempt to consolidate power and ensure politically aligned prosecutions. The outcome of these disputes could set a precedent for how U.S. Attorneys are appointed in the future, with significant implications for judicial independence and the balance of powers.
Verticals
legalnews
Originally published on Above the Law on 2/13/2026