...
By Robert Alexander
Senior Crime & Court Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A federal judge has ruled that Bilal A. “Bill” Essayli, the Trump-appointed acting U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, has been serving unlawfully in that role.
The decision, issued October 28 by U.S. District Judge J. Michael Seabright, found that the Justice Department violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) when it allowed Essayli to remain in charge of the nation’s largest federal prosecutorial district after his temporary appointment expired.
Newsweek contacted the Department of Justice and the office of the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California for comment via email outside of normal office hours on Thursday.
Read More on News
Why It Matters
The dispute over Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli’s appointment goes far beyond one prosecutor’s title.
At issue is whether the Trump administration has sidestepped the Constitution’s separation of powers by keeping unconfirmed appointees in charge of the Justice Department’s most powerful offices.
A federal judge’s finding that Essayli has been serving unlawfully under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act underscores growing judicial resistance to the administration’s use of “acting” officials to bypass Senate confirmation—an approach that affects who controls federal prosecutions, the legitimacy of ongoing cases, and the balance of power between Congress and the presidency.
...
What To Know
Court Finds Appointment Unlawful
Judge Seabright’s 64-page order concluded that “Essayli is not lawfully serving as Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California” and has “been unlawfully serving in that role since he resigned as Interim United States Attorney.”
The court determined that Attorney General Pamela Bondi’s July 29 order—intended to extend Essayli’s tenure by reclassifying him as First Assistant U.S. Attorney and “Special Attorney”—had “no legal effect” under the FVRA’s general acting-service limit of 210 days for most posts, but 120 days for interim U.S. Attorneys under 28 U.S.C. § 546.
The ruling mirrors earlier findings in New Jersey and Nevada, where judges likewise disqualified Trump-installed prosecutors Alina Habba and Sigal Chattah from serving beyond the FVRA’s time limits.
All three opinions cited Congress’s intent to preserve the Senate’s confirmation authority over senior Justice Department officials.
Despite the California court’s decision, Judge Seabright declined to dismiss pending indictments signed under Essayli’s tenure, ruling that the prosecutions “remain valid” because other authorized assistants had participated.
The court nevertheless disqualified Essayli from “performing the functions and duties of the United States Attorney” in those cases.
Essayli Defiant As DOJ Weighs Next Steps
Essayli, 38, said Wednesday he does not plan to step aside. “While I’m still here, I’m not planning to go anywhere,” he told reporters at an NBC news conference in Los Angeles. “We’re less concerned with titles and more concerned with the authority of my position to be able to run this office.”
He added, “The president won the election, the president gets to control and run the executive branch, and through the attorney general, they get to appoint and designate the people they want to serve at their pleasure.”
The Federal Public Defender’s Office, which had asked the court to disqualify Essayli, said in a written statement that it was “glad to see the court recognized the invalidity of Mr. Essayli’s appointment” and hoped the decision would “promote respect for constitutional order.”
It declined to further comment on whether additional motions would be filed if Essayli continues to direct the office.
The Vacancies Reform Act, enacted in 1998, limits acting service in Senate-confirmed positions to defined periods and specifies that any action taken by an official serving in violation of the law “shall have no force or effect.”
Under the statute, once the 120-day term of an interim U.S. attorney appointed by the attorney general expires, the district’s judges may appoint a replacement until the president nominates and the Senate confirms a permanent officeholder.
Essayli’s appointment followed the January 2025 resignation of U.S. Attorney E. Martin Estrada.
He first became interim U.S. Attorney on April 2, 2025, under 28 U.S.C. § 546, with a term set to expire July 31.
Two days before that deadline, Attorney General Bondi issued an order attempting to keep him in charge by shifting his title—an approach Judge Seabright called an “end-run around the Vacancies Act.”
Broader Implications For Elections And Oversight
In related developments, Orange County Registrar of Voters Robert Page is facing a Justice Department lawsuit led by the same U.S. Attorney’s Office, alleging violations of federal voting-rights laws.
It remains unclear whether Essayli’s disqualification will affect that or other civil matters.
At Huntington Beach City Hall, Mayor Pat Burns recently introduced a resolution urging “immediate action to ensure a legally valid and transparent 2026 general election,” citing the need to preserve public confidence in voting systems.
That local push, though unrelated to the federal litigation, reflects the broader political tension over election administration and legal oversight that has surrounded Essayli’s tenure.
For now, Judge Seabright’s order leaves Essayli still managing day-to-day operations as First Assistant U.S. Attorney while his status as the district’s top prosecutor remains in legal limbo. The Justice Department has not announced whether it will appeal.
What People Are Saying
Bill Essayli, in an NBC Los Angeles interview, October 30, 2025, said: “I think the judge has made clear, regardless of my title, I have the authority to run this office. All this is semantics, titles. What matters at the end of the day is that the president won the election, the president gets to control and run the executive branch, and through the attorney general they get to appoint and designate the people they want to serve at their pleasure.”
Federal Public Defender’s Office, in an NBC Los Angeles report: “We are glad to see the court recognized the invalidity of Mr. Essayli’s appointment and hope the decision will promote respect for constitutional order.”
What Happens Next
For now, Bill Essayli remains in charge of the Central District of California’s U.S. Attorney’s Office, but his authority is in legal limbo after a federal judge ruled his appointment unlawful under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
The Justice Department can appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit, seek to install a new interim or permanent U.S. Attorney, or allow local judges to make that appointment if the vacancy persists. Defense lawyers may challenge Essayli’s role in pending prosecutions, and Congress could investigate broader patterns of unconfirmed appointments.
The outcome will determine not just Essayli’s future but how far any administration can go in filling top Justice Department posts without Senate confirmation.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines