A federal judge reinstated Seattle’s top prosecutor hours after President Trump fired him, ruling the president cannot remove a court-appointed U.S. attorney, and Justice is appealing.

U.S. District Judge Stanley Bastian delivered the order from the bench Thursday after a hearing, granting Roger Rogoff’s request to return as U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington until the Senate confirms a replacement. CBS News reported that Bastian held the president cannot unilaterally fire a U.S. attorney installed by the district court under federal vacancy law.

The ruling puts an unelected judge between an elected president and the staffing of a major federal prosecutor’s office, the same pattern of courtroom interference that has repeatedly slowed White House priorities.

Rogoff had been sworn in on July 15 after federal district judges in the Western District of Washington installed him. President Trump removed him less than an hour later. Rogoff sued, arguing the removal was unlawful. Bastian agreed and ordered him restored as the “rightful holder” of the office.

Bastian says the president has no removal power over court picks

Bastian framed the dispute as a question of first impression. He asked whether the president can fire a U.S. attorney appointed by the district court, then answered it directly from the bench.

Judge Stanley Bastian stated:

"The answer to the question the court is faced with is no. The president cannot unilaterally fire a United States attorney appointed by the district court."

He went further, warning that allowing such removals would erase the Senate’s role and the incentive to send up nominees who can actually be confirmed.

Bastian said:

"Allowing the president to fire a U.S. attorney appointed by the district court would upend the framework created by the Constitution and the statutes, which together balance the president's right to appoint and the Senate's right to confirm."

He added that the branches are “supposed to and encouraged to work together,” and that the public interest requires the law be followed so Rogoff can hold the office he already swore into. The Justice Department said it intends to appeal and will immediately seek to halt the ruling.

How a long vacancy handed the seat to district judges

The Seattle office has lacked a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney since mid-2023. That vacuum is what opened the door for judges to step in.

Under the federal vacancy statute described in the case, the attorney general may name an interim U.S. attorney for up to 120 days. After that clock runs out, the district court may extend the interim or appoint its own U.S. attorney until the Senate confirms a presidential nominee.

District judges first appointed Tessa Gorman in May 2024. President Trump fired her after taking office. Charles Neil Floyd then led the office as interim U.S. attorney beginning in October; his 120-day term expired in February, and he continued as first assistant while still running day-to-day operations. On July 15, the district judges installed Rogoff, who took the oath. Trump fired him almost immediately and later signed an order directing Floyd “to perform the functions and duties of the office of United States Attorney.”

Bastian rejected that arrangement. He declared Floyd “is not the United States attorney,” said the authority granted to him was improper, and barred the administration from treating anyone other than Rogoff as the U.S. attorney. The order also prohibits the White House from effectuating the firing, denying Rogoff access to benefits and resources, or obstructing his duties until a Senate-confirmed replacement is in place. The Washington Examiner noted Bastian is an Obama-appointed judge and that the order functions as a preliminary injunction protecting Rogoff’s hold on the office.

That kind of judicial roadblock has become familiar. A second federal judge recently blocked a major Trump administration fee policy on new H-1B visas, another example of district courts freezing executive action at the starting gate.

Seventeen judges picked Rogoff after the Senate left the post empty

Breitbart reported that all 17 judges in the district unanimously appointed Rogoff in July after the administration had not secured a Senate-confirmed nominee. Bastian leaned on the text of the vacancy law itself.

Bastian said of the statute:

"It does not say 'until the president fires the person selected.'"

Last month Trump nominated Simon Peter Serrano for the Seattle post. Last week he signed the order directing Floyd to carry out the office’s functions. The court still ordered Rogoff restored and locked the administration out of any end-run around that result.

Rogoff, in a statement provided after the ruling, cast the fight in constitutional terms.

Roger Rogoff said:

"I care deeply about the rule of law and the careful checks and balances envisioned by our Founders and carried out by Congress."

He added that he is “now focused on assuming the role of U.S. attorney and getting to work for the people of Western Washington.”

Readers watching other courtroom fights will recognize the larger tension. An appeals court recently blocked a White House construction project and drew a vow to take the fight higher, the same executive-versus-bench collision now playing out over who runs federal prosecutions in Seattle.

Similar appointment fights already hit Nevada, New York, Virginia, and New Jersey

The Seattle standoff is not isolated. Federal courts have already found certain Trump efforts to install preferred U.S. attorney candidates unlawful in Nevada, New York, Virginia, and New Jersey, though some of those disputes turned on different appointment mechanisms. The common thread is the same: judges policing who may lead the president’s own prosecuting arm while the Senate leaves seats open.

When vacancies drag on for years, district judges gain leverage the Framers never designed as a permanent staffing model. The statute was built as a bridge to a Senate-confirmed nominee, not a shield that lets court appointees outlast the elected president who must answer for federal law enforcement.

GOP lawmakers have started answering judicial blocks with political hardball of their own. One Republican congressman filed an impeachment resolution against a federal judge who halted a Trump termination of temporary protected status, a sign that patience for open-ended district-court vetoes is wearing thin on the right.

What the order actually forbids the administration from doing

Bastian’s bench ruling does more than restore a title. It freezes the executive branch’s practical control of the office.

Until a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney is in place, the administration may not put Rogoff’s firing into effect, purport to remove him, deny him benefits or resources, obstruct his duties, or treat anyone else, including Floyd, as the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington. Bastian held Rogoff has been the rightful holder since the July 15 oath.

That is a sweeping limit on a president’s ability to direct the prosecutors who carry out federal law in one of the country’s major districts. It also reduces pressure on the Senate to move nominees, because court appointees can now claim judicial protection against removal.

Other benches have shown a similar willingness to preserve policies the administration moved to end. A federal judge defied a Supreme Court ruling to keep temporary protected status in place for South Sudanese nationals, another instance of lower-court power used to lock in outcomes the White House sought to reverse.

Justice vows an immediate fight to halt the ruling

The Justice Department did not accept the bench decision as final. It said it will appeal and will immediately seek a halt so the order does not control the office while higher courts review it.

That posture matches the administration’s broader stance in appointment and enforcement disputes: push back in court rather than surrender the executive’s traditional lead on who runs U.S. attorney offices. A separate D.C. Circuit panel drew sharp backlash for blocking IRS-ICE data sharing, showing how quickly appellate language and enforcement limits become political flashpoints when judges cabin the president’s agencies.

The core problem remains institutional. An office without a Senate-confirmed leader since mid-2023 invited judicial appointment. Once judges made the pick, a district judge then ruled the president cannot undo it. The constitutional design puts appointment power with the president and confirmation with the Senate. Court-run caretaker appointments were never meant to become a second, removal-proof track.

If senators will not confirm and judges will not yield, voters lose the clean line of accountability that is supposed to run from federal prosecutors to the president who nominates them. The Justice Department’s appeal is the next test of whether that line still holds.

Presidents answer to the country for crime and prosecution. District judges do not. When courts both fill U.S. attorney vacancies and then lock those picks in place, the people lose the control the Constitution gave them through elections and the Senate.