• Comey seeks to dismiss charges citing "fundamental errors" in grand jury proceedings.
• The DOJ confirms the grand jury reviewed charges against Comey, conflicting with earlier statements.
• Defense argues Halligan's handling of the indictment compromised its validity.

The legal battle surrounding former FBI Director James Comey continues as he seeks to dismiss charges based on claims of "fundamental errors" in the grand jury process. His legal team contends that significant mistakes were made in the indictment procedure, alleging prejudicial conduct by Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan. Comey’s lawyers argue that Halligan rushed the indictment after being appointed amid pressure from political figures seeking to prosecute him, which they claim violates his Fifth Amendment rights, according to CBS News and ABC News.

In a recent reversal, the Justice Department asserted that the grand jury did review a final two-count indictment against Comey, conflicting with Halligan's earlier statement indicating that jurors had not seen the revised document. This inconsistency has raised questions about the integrity of the indictment process. According to the DOJ, Halligan clarified that the grand jury had indeed reviewed the final indictment; however, her assertion was met with skepticism by Comey's defense, who described the DOJ's late attempt to correct the record as contradictory to previous claims made in court, as reported by The Hill and ABC News.

Defense attorneys highlighted that Halligan, lacking prior prosecutorial experience, improperly presented evidence to the grand jury, potentially violating fundamental grand jury rules. This included allegations of misstatements regarding Comey's constitutional rights and the use of evidence obtained through questionable search warrants from a prior investigation. This has led to concerns voiced by Judge Michael Nachmanoff about whether the indictment was valid, as Comey argues there is no properly returned indictment against him, according to CBS News and ABC News.

Additionally, U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick reviewed the grand jury transcripts and expressed concerns over Halligan’s compliance with legal standards, indicating potential substantive deficiencies in the materials presented to the jury. Fitzpatrick noted that Halligan’s conduct raised serious questions about whether the grand jury's decisions were made based on sound legal principles, emphasizing the troubling nature of the prosecution's approach, as cited by CBS News and The Hill.