U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled on April 28 that Maurene Comey’s lawsuit against the DOJ can proceed in federal court, the judge finding her claims arise under Article II rather than the Civil Service Reform Act, according to court filings and coverage of the case.
Furman rejected the Justice Department’s bid to force Comey to seek review before the Merit Systems Protection Board, saying her claims ‘‘fall outside of the MSPB’s traditional expertise’’ and deserve judicial review, the opinion linked by POLITICO states.
Comey sued after her abrupt firing from the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan last summer; she alleges she was removed ‘‘solely or substantially because her father is former FBI Director James B. Comey, or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both,’’ court papers and reporting say.
The decision came in a 27-page opinion that concluded the department’s argument rested on invoking the Constitution alone, which would leave Comey without meaningful judicial review, POLITICO reported and linked the court opinion in its story.
Bloomberg Law and Courthouse News also reported that Judge Furman declined the DOJ’s effort to move the dispute into an administrative process and allowed the wrongful-termination suit to stay in district court.
Comey’s lawyers said they welcomed the ruling. POLITICO quoted attorney Ellen Blain saying, “we are thrilled” and that no president can fire a career federal employee based solely on her last name, language included in the outlet’s coverage of the reaction.
The case docket is publicly available; CourtListener lists the suit as Comey v. United States Department of Justice, filed Sept. 15, 2025, and includes filings that frame the procedural dispute Furman resolved, the docket shows.
Why it matters: the ruling leaves a path for a federal-judge to decide constitutional and statutory questions about presidential removal power and civil-service protections rather than having those issues resolved first by an administrative board, as POLITICO and Bloomberg Law explain.
Readers wanting more on related Justice Department legal and staffing developments can see coverage of internal DOJ shifts like Joe diGenova resigns from DOJ role and policy shifts such as the Trump administration refocuses DOJ civil rights unit, which provide broader context for personnel and priority disputes inside the department.
Sources
- POLITICO — reported the April 28 ruling, quoted the opinion and linked the 27-page court decision.
- Bloomberg Law — covered the judge’s rejection of the DOJ’s administrative-review argument and summarized legal implications.
- Courthouse News — reported that the district court allowed Comey’s wrongful-termination suit to proceed.
- CourtListener — provided the case docket Comey v. United States Department of Justice and the filed documents.
