The U.S. Department of Justice has accepted a federal district court's appointment of Robert Frazer as interim U.S. attorney for New Jersey. This move ends an eight-month leadership vacuum in the office following the expiration of Alina Habba's term. The concession comes after multiple court rulings against the department's attempts to retain acting prosecutors.
On Monday, the Justice Department filed a notice accepting the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey's appointment of Robert Frazer, a longtime prosecutor, as head of the state's U.S. attorney's office. Frazer, installed by the court's chief judge, immediately signed documents to validate ongoing prosecutions that had been at risk due to prior leadership issues. The department's action reverses its previous stance that district courts lack authority to make such appointments, a position it had maintained amid losses in courts across Virginia, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, California, and New Mexico. Federal law allows Attorney General Pam Bondi to appoint interim U.S. attorneys for up to 120 days after presidential nominees expire without Senate confirmation. Courts can then appoint successors to serve indefinitely. The Trump administration had installed figures including Alina Habba and Lindsey Halligan, who faced rejection in Senate confirmation processes. When courts stepped in—naming individuals such as Desiree Leigh Grace in New Jersey, James Hundley in Virginia, and Donald Kinsella in New York—Bondi removed them. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated on X that 'judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does,' citing Article II of the Constitution. Tensions peaked in New Jersey, where the department appointed a 'triumvirate' of prosecutors after court rejections, prompting U.S. District Judge Zahid Quraishi to eject a prosecutor from his courtroom last week. 'Generations of assistant U.S. attorneys had built the goodwill of that office for your generation to destroy it within a year,' Quraishi said. 'What you’ve told me today, what your representation is … I don’t believe.' The episode highlights ongoing disputes over appointment powers under the separation of branches, with courts asserting their statutory role.
