Federal prosecutors have initiated a new criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey, alleging that he leaked national defense information. A recent court filing reveals that the Department of Justice is moving forward with two counts against the former agency head. This development represents the third time the justice department has pursued criminal charges against Comey, a figure who has remained a prominent critic of President Donald Trump.
According to legal papers filed separately by Comey's attorneys, the current case originates from an alleged disclosure of classified information to the New York Times in October 2016. At that time, Comey was serving as the director of the FBI. While the initial three-page filing provides limited details about the specific counts, the defense has clarified the timeline and nature of the alleged misconduct in their own submissions to the court.
Comey has publicly rejected the accusations, posting a video on the platform Substack on Monday to address the news. In the clip, he described the charges as an appalling abuse of the department of justice and stated that he remains innocent. He expressed confidence in the independent federal judiciary and noted that he is not afraid of the individuals involved in the prosecution.
The charges were brought forward in Washington DC through a criminal information, which is a formal written document filed directly by a prosecutor. This legal mechanism differs from a criminal indictment, which requires approval from a grand jury composed of sworn citizens who review the strength of the evidence before allowing a prosecution to proceed.
Patrick Fitzgerald, one of Comey's lawyers, noted in a statement that two separate teams of prosecutors had previously investigated the alleged disclosure to the New York Times during the first Trump administration. Fitzgerald pointed out that both prior investigations concluded that no charges should be brought against anyone. His legal team has since filed a motion to dismiss the current charges, arguing that the filing purports to charge Comey with crimes he did not commit.
Legal experts have weighed in on the viability of the new case. Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner told the BBC that the statute of limitations, which is typically ten years for such offenses, may have expired. He suggested that this factor gives the motion to dismiss a very good chance of being granted. Kirschner also characterized the charges as a revenge-fueled attempt by President Trump to have his Department of Justice find evidence that might stick.
Comey's conflict with the White House dates back to his dismissal during Trump's first term. He was fired after opening an investigation into claims of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Since that firing, Trump has repeatedly called for his prosecution, making this the third attempt by the administration to bring criminal charges against the former director.
The first attempt occurred in September 2025, when a federal grand jury indicted Comey on charges of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. He pleaded not guilty the following month, but the case was dismissed in November. In April 2026, Comey surrendered to authorities to face a second set of charges related to a social media post. Prosecutors alleged that an image he shared, featuring seashells arranged to read 86 47, posed a threat to Trump's life. Comey maintains that he did not know the slang meaning of the numbers and that the case is politically motivated. That trial is currently ongoing.
The latest charges against Comey were announced on the same day that a federal judge ruled the justice department had illegally fired his daughter, Maurene Comey. Maurene Comey, who was a federal prosecutor in New York, lost her job in July 2025. She sued the government, arguing that her termination was unlawful due to her father's status and her perceived political affiliations. The judge ordered the Trump administration to reinstate her and provide back pay.
This series of legal actions highlights the continued tension between the executive branch and former officials who criticized the president. As the new case unfolds, the defense continues to argue that the timing and nature of the charges reflect a broader political strategy rather than a standard application of criminal law.
