Defense Lawyers Ask for Fast-Track Appeal
Nevada’s federal public defender’s office filed papers on Wednesday asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to speed up the government’s appeal in a major legal fight over who can legally serve as our state’s top federal prosecutor. This isn’t just another courthouse dispute – it’s about whether the government can bypass Senate confirmation rules to keep its chosen prosecutors in power.
How We Got Here
The controversy started back in March when President Trump appointed Sigal Chattah as interim U.S. Attorney for Nevada. Under federal law, that temporary appointment could only last 120 days. That time limit would have run out in July.
But here’s where things get interesting. The day before her 120-day term was set to expire, Chattah resigned from her position as interim U.S. Attorney. That same day, Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Chattah as the state’s first assistant U.S. attorney, which automatically made her the acting U.S. Attorney.
This wasn’t just a simple title change. The acting U.S. attorney position requires serving a minimum of 210 days in the office, and has no cap on how long she can serve. The Trump administration was essentially trying to extend Chattah’s tenure without getting Senate approval.
Defense Lawyers Challenge the Appointment
In late August, defense lawyers started fighting back. The federal public defender’s office filed motions arguing that Chattah’s term expired in July and that she has been doing her job since then without “force or effect.”
The defense pointed to a similar case in New Jersey, where a federal judge had already ruled that another Trump-appointed acting U.S. Attorney was serving illegally. They argued the same principle should apply in Nevada.
The Judge’s Ruling
On September 30, U.S. District Judge David Campbell sided with the defense lawyers. Campbell ruled that the Justice Department wasn’t legally allowed to shift Chattah to the role of first assistant U.S. attorney in order to have her take on the acting job.
The judge wrote that:
“The Court cannot accept the government’s assertion that the Attorney General has power to designate anyone she chooses as first assistant and have that person become the acting U.S. Attorney.”
He called this exactly the kind of executive action that Congress tried to prevent when it passed the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Campbell didn’t dismiss the criminal cases entirely. Instead, he disqualified Chattah from supervising four federal prosecutions.
He ruled that:
“The Court cannot conclude that Ms. Chattah’s role is anything less than Acting U.S. Attorney, a position she cannot hold.”
Both Sides Appeal
The federal government filed a notice of appeal in each of the four criminal cases. They want the appeals court to reverse the judge’s decision and let Chattah resume supervising the prosecutions.
The defense lawyers filed cross-appeals, arguing the judge should have gone further and thrown out the indictments completely. That brings us to yesterday’s filing asking for expedited review.
Why Conservatives Should Care
This case hits at the heart of conservative principles about limited government and constitutional checks and balances. If the executive branch can simply bypass Senate confirmation requirements through creative job title changes, what’s to stop any administration from ignoring other constitutional requirements?
The U.S. Attorney’s office has enormous power. They decide who gets prosecuted federally, can seize property, freeze bank accounts, and send people to federal prison for decades. When there’s doubt about whether the person running that office has legal authority to be there, it undermines the rule of law.
The Stakes Are Real
Four defendants are currently awaiting trial while this legal battle plays out. Every federal criminal case in Nevada could potentially be affected by the outcome.
The defense lawyers point out that a former Nevada U.S. attorney said:
“That obviously poses certain practical problems and a certain degree of chaos within the office as this is all being sorted out.”
What the Government Says
Federal prosecutors maintain that Chattah is legally serving in her role. They argued that even if Chattah was not legitimately serving as acting U.S. attorney, “she would be fully authorized, by delegation, to supervise criminal prosecutions in Nevada” because the attorney general gave her another title, “special attorney”.
Some might say this is just lawyers fighting over technicalities. But when it comes to the power to prosecute and potentially imprison American citizens, those technicalities are the guardrails that protect our freedom.
What Happens Next
The Ninth Circuit will first decide whether to speed up the appeal. The defense has proposed having all briefs filed by mid-December. They note that a similar case in the Third Circuit has already been put on the fast track.
If the appeals court agrees to expedite, we could have a decision by early next year. If not, this could drag on for months while the legitimacy of Nevada’s federal prosecutions remains in question.
Taking Action
This situation shows why it matters who holds positions of power and whether they’re legally qualified to be there. Every appointment needs to follow the law – not just the preferences of whoever’s in charge.
Nevada conservatives should watch this case closely. When government officials try to bypass legal requirements – regardless of party – it’s up to us to demand accountability. Contact your representatives if you’re concerned about the integrity of federal law enforcement in Nevada.
A government that follows its own rules is a government that respects the people it serves.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
