A unanimous federal appeals panel ruled Monday that Sigal Chattah has been serving unlawfully as Nevada's top federal prosecutor, a decision that bars her from three criminal cases and could force the administration's hand on Senate confirmation.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Justice Department's strategy of reappointing Chattah as first assistant U.S. attorney, a maneuver designed to extend her tenure after her 180-day interim term expired, violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. The three-judge panel upheld a lower court ruling from Arizona District Judge David G. Campbell, who reached the same conclusion last September.
Chattah remains in the office for now. The appeals court allowed her to stay pending a possible Supreme Court appeal, but the ruling strips her authority to supervise or participate in three federal criminal cases. The specific cases were not identified in the court's order.
The panel included two judges appointed by President Trump, a detail that undercuts any suggestion the ruling was driven by partisan hostility. U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Miller, one of those Trump appointees, wrote for the panel:
"These cases present the question whether the Attorney General can make someone an Acting United States Attorney, bypassing the usual requirement that a U.S. Attorney be confirmed by the Senate, by designating that person as the first assistant to an already-vacant office of U.S. Attorney. We hold that the Attorney General cannot do so."
Miller went further, closing off a fallback argument the DOJ had floated, that even if Chattah could not serve as acting U.S. attorney, the attorney general could simply delegate all the duties of the office to her under a different legal theory.
"Nor can the Attorney General create a de facto Acting U.S. Attorney by delegating all of the functions and duties of the U.S. Attorney to someone else."
That language matters. It does not merely reject one workaround. It closes the door on the broader strategy of keeping a preferred prosecutor in place without Senate confirmation by dressing up the appointment under a different title.
President Trump first appointed Chattah to the Nevada post on April 1, 2025, in a 180-day interim capacity. As that window neared its end, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Chattah as first assistant U.S. attorney. The move was supposed to trigger a separate provision of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, the law that governs how the executive branch fills vacant Senate-confirmed positions, granting Chattah another 210 days as acting U.S. attorney.
The court saw through the maneuver. Under the provision the DOJ relied on, a first assistant can step into an acting role only if that person already held the first-assistant position when the vacancy occurred. Chattah did not. She was installed as first assistant after the vacancy opened, specifically to exploit the loophole. The Washington Examiner reported that Chattah resigned the day before her original term expired in July 2025 and was immediately reappointed as first assistant, a sequence that only reinforced the court's conclusion that the appointment was a workaround, not a legitimate succession.
Federal law provides its own remedy when no permanent U.S. attorney is confirmed within 120 days: judges of the relevant district court, in this case, the Nevada District Court, can appoint an interim U.S. attorney themselves. That provision exists precisely to prevent the executive branch from parking an unconfirmed loyalist in a powerful prosecutorial post indefinitely.
The administration's approach amounted to an end-run around that safeguard. The courts, including judges the president himself appointed, said no. Similar disputes have played out in recent clashes between the courts and the administration, reinforcing the judiciary's insistence on constitutional boundaries even when the political stakes cut against its own appointing president.
The Chattah ruling is not an isolated setback. AP News reported that courts have rejected the same playbook in California, where Bill Essayli faced a similar challenge, and in New Jersey, where the Third Circuit disqualified Alina Habba, Trump's former personal lawyer, from serving as acting U.S. attorney in a December ruling.
Three federal circuits. Three unanimous or decisive rulings. Three rejections of the same legal theory. At some point, a pattern of losses stops looking like bad luck and starts looking like a flawed strategy.
The administration has named Las Vegas lawyer George Kelesis as its nominee for the permanent Nevada U.S. attorney post, but his Senate confirmation process remains in limbo. Nevada's two Democratic senators, Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen, have publicly opposed the administration's approach to the office. They called Chattah "an extremist and an election denier" and vowed to block any attempt to make her appointment permanent.
Sen. Rosen posted on X after Monday's ruling:
"Sigal Chattah has always been unfit to serve as Nevada's U.S. Attorney, and I'm glad to see the Ninth Circuit agree her appointment is illegal. It's past time for her to vacate the position and leave the U.S. Attorney's office once and for all."
Rosen's characterization of Chattah as "unfit" is her political judgment, not the court's finding. The court ruled on the legality of the appointment mechanism, not on Chattah's qualifications. But the senator's eagerness to spike the ball illustrates how the administration's legal missteps hand ammunition to its opponents.
Conservatives who believe in constitutional order should not be comfortable with any administration, Republican or Democrat, finding creative ways to bypass Senate confirmation for powerful federal prosecutors. U.S. attorneys wield enormous discretion over which cases to bring, which communities to target, and which federal priorities to enforce. That power is precisely why the Constitution requires Senate advice and consent.
The Federal Vacancies Reform Act was written to provide temporary flexibility, not a permanent workaround. When the 180-day clock runs out and no nominee has been confirmed, the law shifts appointment authority to the district court, a check designed to prevent exactly what happened here. The administration has shown willingness to push legal boundaries on multiple fronts, and courts have repeatedly drawn the line.
The question now is whether the DOJ will ask the Supreme Court to take the case. The 9th Circuit's decision to let Chattah remain in office pending a possible appeal suggests the panel recognized the disruption an immediate removal would cause. But with three circuits now aligned against the administration's theory, the legal terrain is steep.
Meanwhile, Kelesis's confirmation sits unresolved. If the administration wants its preferred prosecutor in Nevada, the path runs through the Senate, the same path the Constitution laid out. Shortcuts through the Federal Vacancies Reform Act have now failed in three circuits, and the Supreme Court has shown it will not simply rubber-stamp the administration's preferred legal theories.
Several open questions remain. The three criminal cases from which Chattah is now barred have not been publicly identified. Whether the DOJ will petition the Supreme Court is unclear. And whether Kelesis can secure confirmation with both Nevada senators opposed remains an open fight.
None of those uncertainties change the core takeaway. The law sets a process for filling powerful federal offices. When an administration, any administration, tries to sidestep that process, the courts exist to say so. Three circuits just did, unanimously.
If the rule of law means anything, it means following the rules even when they slow you down.
