Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Former assistant U.S. attorney alleges Trump administration fired her unlawfully for her political affiliations, (Sep 16, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz J.D.

The complaint seeks declaratory relief, reinstatement, and back pay.

Maurene Comey, a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, alleges in a new lawsuit that she was fired without cause, advance notice, or an opportunity to contest the firing, in violation of her constitutional rights and her statutory protections under the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA). The complaint alleges the Trump administration fired Comey “solely or substantially because her father is former FBI Director James B. Comey, or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both.”

The complaint lists as defendants the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Executive Office of the President; Francey Hakes, the director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys; U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi; the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys; the Office of Personnel Management (OPM); and the United States of America. Comey seeks relief under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, the All Writs Act, and the U.S. Constitution, including the First and Fifth Amendments.

Termination. The plaintiff, who previously prosecuted high-profile defendants including Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, served as an assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from November 16, 2015, until July 16, 2025, when the defendants terminated her employment abruptly, the day after the U.S. Attorney’s Office had asked her to take the lead on a major public corruption case and three months after she received her most recent performance review of “Outstanding.” The complaint alleges the defendants did not identify any cause or provide the plaintiff with any due process for her removal, simply sending her an email with an attachment stating she was being terminated “[p]ursuant to Article II of the United States Constitution and the laws of the United States.”

Calls for firing. The plaintiff’s father, James Comey, served as the director of the FBI from 2013 until President Trump fired him in 2017. Following a social media post by Mr. Comey in May 2025, which the Trump administration claimed to perceive as threatening, Trump supporters called for the plaintiff’s firing. One supporter, social media influencer Laura Loomer, called for Mr. Comey’s “liberal daughter” and her “Democrat husband” to be “FIRED from the DOJ immediately” “for being a national security risk via their proximity to a criminal [i.e. Mr. Comey] who just committed a felony by threatening to assassinate the President.” After the plaintiff’s termination, Loomer boasted that the decision stemmed from her “pressure campaign” on Pam Bondi to fire the plaintiff and her husband from the DOJ. The complaint states that President Trump has publicly stated, “If you’re Loomered you’re in deep trouble. That’s the end of your career in a sense.”

Claims. The complaint argues that the plaintiff’s politically motivated termination “upends bedrock principles of our democracy and justice system,” as public servants like the plaintiff “must do their jobs without fearing or favoring any political party or perspective, guided solely by the law, the facts, and the pursuit of justice.” The complaint further argues that the executive branch cannot use Article II to overrule Congress’s intent to place guardrails on the removal of federal employees under the CSRA to remove career civil servants for perceived disloyalty and that the plaintiff’s firing violated the Separation of Powers. The complaint also brings claims for violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment.

Relief sought. The plaintiff requests that the court provide a declaration that the defendants violated the Separation of Powers; a declaration that the defendants’ reliance on Article II as a removal authority was invalid; a declaration that the defendants violated the APA; a declaration that the firing violated the plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment due process and statutory rights and an order for appropriate relief; a declaration that the firing violated the plaintiff’s First Amendment free speech and free association rights and an order for appropriate relief; and an order requiring the defendant to immediately reinstate the plaintiff and enjoining the defendants from taking any further adverse personnel action against the plaintiff without providing appropriate procedural and substantive due process as required under the CSRA and the Fifth Amendment. The plaintiff further seeks back pay and other monetary and administrative relief, as well as costs and fees.

The case is No. 1:25-cv-07625.

News: LitigationNewsTrends PublicEmployees Discharge AgencyNews IndividualRights