A federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump’s administration acted unlawfully when it attempted to install Alina Habba as the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, marking one of the most consequential legal setbacks for the administration’s appointment practices since Trump returned to office. The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court ruling that found Habba’s appointment violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, a statute intended to prevent the executive branch from bypassing Senate confirmation requirements by relying on extended acting appointments.
The ruling arises from a months-long dispute over the Trump administration’s efforts to position Habba, the president’s former personal attorney, as New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor. Habba’s path to the office began in March 2025, when the administration named her interim U.S. attorney under a provision of the Vacancies Reform Act that permits temporary service for a limited period. During that time, the administration also officially nominated her for Senate confirmation. The Senate did not act on the nomination, leaving it pending without approval.
When Habba’s one hundred and twenty day interim window closed in early July, the judges of the U.S. District Court for New Jersey declined to extend her service and instead appointed her first assistant to the position of acting U.S. attorney. Rather than allow that court-appointed leadership to stand, the Trump administration attempted an administrative workaround. It withdrew Habba’s nomination, removed the first assistant who had been placed in the acting role, designated Habba as a special attorney, and then elevated her to first assistant again in an effort to automatically position her as acting U.S. attorney through internal succession rules. A federal district judge later described these steps as an unprecedented chain of personnel actions designed to reinsert Habba into a role the courts had declined to grant her.
The district court eventually determined that the maneuver violated the Vacancies Reform Act, which contains a clear nomination bar preventing individuals under active consideration by the Senate from serving in an acting capacity. The court found that the administration’s attempt to withdraw the nomination and reconfigure job titles to restore Habba to power ran contrary to both the letter and the intent of the law. The Vacancies Reform Act establishes specific procedures for filling temporary vacancies and prohibits the executive branch from effectively installing a nominee without Senate approval through procedural reshuffling.
The Third Circuit agreed with that assessment, finding that the administration’s actions did not comply with the exclusive mechanisms Congress laid out for filling the office. The appeals court concluded that internal designations and delegated authorities cannot be used to override statutory limits, and it affirmed that Habba was barred from serving as acting U.S. attorney after July 1. The ruling reinforced the constitutional role of the Senate in confirming United States attorneys, emphasizing that allowing an administration to maintain control of such positions through administrative improvisation would undermine the separation of powers.
The decision carries significant implications not only for New Jersey but for federal districts where similar interim appointment strategies may have been used since Trump’s return to office. Legal analysts note that this is the first appellate decision to directly address the administration’s broader pattern of attempting to install preferred candidates through extended acting roles, and the ruling may prompt additional challenges in other jurisdictions.
For the Justice Department, the ruling means that the leadership of the New Jersey office must be reassessed and that any decisions made under Habba’s disputed tenure may come under review. More broadly, the case highlights an emerging tension between the administration’s desire to rapidly place loyalists in key positions and the procedural safeguards Congress established to ensure oversight and accountability in federal appointments.
As President Trump begins the second year of his new term, the decision underscores that the courts remain willing to enforce the structural limits on executive authority, even in politically charged circumstances. The ruling stands as a clear reaffirmation of the boundaries set by the Vacancies Reform Act and signals that the judiciary will continue to scrutinize efforts to circumvent the established processes governing federal leadership roles.