Federal Judge Disqualifies Trump-Backed Prosecutor in Los Angeles

A federal judge disqualified the United States Attorney in Los Angeles on Tuesday, the latest rebuke to the Trump administration’s attempts to circumvent congressional approval for federal prosecutors.

The ruling creates leadership uncertainty in the nation’s largest judicial district, the Central District of California, which serves seven counties in the Los Angeles area. The order was issued by Judge J. Michael Seabright of the Federal District Court in Hawaii, who ruled that the Trump appointee, Bill Essayli, “is not lawfully serving as acting United States Attorney” and “cannot continue to perform any role” that job entails.

But it was unclear what the practical effect of his order would be, since the judge also allowed Mr. Essayli to revert to the role of the office’s top deputy, as the first assistant United States attorney.

The judge, an appointee of George W. Bush, said he shared concerns expressed by lawyers who had challenged Mr. Essayli’s status that the result was “little remedy at all” and agreed that the Department of Justice was effectively circumventing the intent of the law. But he said he was constrained “to apply the statutes as written.”

The judge also did not dismiss the three criminal cases being prosecuted by the U.S. attorney’s office in which defense lawyers had argued that Mr. Essayli lacked legal standing to prosecute. And while Mr. Essayli could not supervise the cases as the head of the office, the judge ruled, he could supervise them as the office’s top deputy.

A spokesman for Mr. Essayli could not immediately be reached for comment.

The Trump administration’s strategy of forgoing congressional approval has clouded the legitimacy of several prominent regional offices of the Department of Justice. Three federal judges have now rejected attempts by the administration to retain federal prosecutors on an “acting” basis, without Senate or judicial confirmation, after their initial 120-day terms expired. A fourth challenge was brought last week by James Comey, the former F.B.I. director, who has asserted in court filings that Lindsey Halligan, a prosecutor Mr. Trump put in place in Virginia, was improperly appointed.

And California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office confirmed on Tuesday that the governor had hired one of the federal prosecutors purged by the Trump administration, Michele Beckwith, the former acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento.

Last month, a federal judge disqualified Nevada’s top federal prosecutor, Sigal Chattah, from handling four cases, saying that she was “not validly serving as acting U.S. attorney” and that her involvement in cases “would be unlawful.” Challenges have since arisen in other federal cases brought in that state. In August, a different judge ruled that Alina Habba, a former personal lawyer for Mr. Trump, had been serving as New Jersey’s U.S. attorney without legal authority. Both decisions have been appealed.

Mr. Essayli and Ms. Chattah had initially been appointed “interim” U.S. attorneys. Interim appointments expire after 120 days, but in late July, the Trump administration extended their terms by naming them both acting U.S. attorneys. Permanent U.S. attorney appointments typically require approval either by the U.S. Senate or by federal judges in the affected district.

In a hearing on Mr. Essayli’s situation in Los Angeles earlier this month, lawyers debated the fine points of laws dictating the rules for appointments, which are not always straightforward. Alexander Robbins, an assistant U.S. attorney, argued that “it’s pretty clear that Mr. Essayli legitimately works here, like I do and like all the other A.U.S.A.s in this office.”

Public defenders in Nevada and California have led the challenges but have not discussed them publicly. But they have been joined by other lawyers who have.

“They are trying to get around congressional oversight,” Mark Windsor, one of the private lawyers challenging Mr. Essayli’s appointment on behalf of a client, said during the hearing in Los Angeles. “I don’t think that this court can avoid the conclusion that this really is an intentional, knowing, deliberate attempt to circumvent some of the key safeguards within our Constitution and that it deserves the most extreme remedy that this court can fashion in order to deter that conduct,” he added.

The case is likely to be appealed along with the others. In remarks during the court hearing, Judge Seabright said that “no matter what” he ruled, the case would inevitably end up before a higher court.

Mr. Essayli, a former state assemblyman who once worked as an assistant U.S. attorney, is a Trump ally who has been far more outspoken on political issues than have many of his predecessors. In social media posts, he has criticized Gov. Gavin Newsom of California and Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles, both Democrats. In an appearance on Fox News, he said that many state lawmakers appeared to have “a disease in the mind” and “want soft-on-crime policies.”

He ramped up an investigation of California high school sports after a transgender girl qualified for three events at the state track and field championships.

And he has played a high-profile role in the administration’s response to protests surrounding immigration raids in the Los Angeles area. In June, after a prominent union leader was injured during an arrest while protesting the raids, Mr. Essayli said, “I don’t care who you are — if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted.”