<p>A federal judge restored Roger Rogoff as the top federal prosecutor in Seattle on Thursday, ruling that President Donald Trump could not fire a U.S. attorney whom district judges had appointed less than an hour earlier.</p>
<p>U.S. District Judge Stanley Bastian, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, granted Rogoff a preliminary injunction and ordered the Trump administration not to obstruct his access to the resources of the U.S. attorney’s office for the Western District of Washington.</p>
<p>“Congress did not give the power to fill this inferior office to the president alone,” Bastian stated from the bench. The president “cannot unilaterally fire a United States attorney appointed by the district court.”</p>
<p>Bastian declined to pause his ruling while the Trump administration appeals.</p>
<p>The decision marked the first court victory for a judicially appointed U.S. attorney removed during the administration’s fight with federal judges over control of federal prosecutor offices. Rogoff was the first prosecutor among those removed in other states to sue.</p>
<p>Federal law allows the attorney general to appoint an interim U.S. attorney for 120 days. If the vacancy remains, district judges may appoint a prosecutor to serve until the president nominates and the Senate confirms a replacement.</p>
<p>The judges in western Washington unanimously selected Rogoff on July 15 after the office remained without a Senate-confirmed leader. Trump fired him 54 minutes after he took the oath.</p>
<p>Bastian stated that Rogoff had been the lawful officeholder since his swearing-in.</p>
<p>Abhishek Kambli, a former Justice Department lawyer, indicated that the dispute could reach the Supreme Court. The immediate question is whether the removal provision for presidentially appointed U.S. attorneys also applies to prosecutors appointed by judges.</p>
<p>A broader constitutional dispute sits beneath that question. Kambli noted that the Supreme Court has preserved limits on presidential removal only for “inferior officers with limited duties and no policymaking or administrative authority,” making Rogoff’s position difficult if an appeals court addresses the president’s Article II powers.</p>
<p>Former federal prosecutor Bill Shipley identified a practical limit on the ruling in a post on X. He mentioned that the DOJ office that allocates staff nationwide answers to the attorney general, who could reassign Seattle personnel even if Rogoff remains in charge.</p>
<p>“But the AG has the power to empty the office and have Mr. Rogoff working alone. All the staff can be reassigned to work electronically for other U.S. Attorneys Offices,” Shipley stated.</p>
<p>Rogoff expressed gratitude that the court required compliance with the Constitution and federal law.</p>
<p>“Now I need to get to work,” he said.</p>
<p>The DOJ stated that the legal fight was not over.</p>
<p>“We disagree with the decision and intend to seek an immediate stay and will appeal,” the department’s rapid response account on X said.</p>