Justice Department fires U.S. attorney in New York hours after judges picked him for the job

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CBS News

February 12, 2026 / 12:02 AM EST


A panel of judges in New York appointed a new top federal prosecutor in Albany on Wednesday after a Trump nominee was found to be serving in the role unlawfully — but within hours, the Justice Department announced it had fired the judges' new hire. The back-and-forth adds to months of friction between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary over who is allowed to lead U.S. attorney's offices around the country.

In a somewhat unusual move, the judges in the Albany-based Northern District of New York said Wednesday they had appointed and sworn in a new person to lead the U.S. attorney's office: Former prosecutor Donald T. Kinsella. They cited a law that allows judges to temporarily name people to that job if the role becomes vacant because an interim U.S. attorney's term has expired.

A month earlier, a federal judge had ruled that acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York John Sarcone was serving in that role unlawfully, opening up the job. Then, late Wednesday evening, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche rebuked the judges' decision, writing on X: "You are fired, Donald Kinsella."

"Judges don't pick U.S. Attorneys, [the president] does. See Article II of our Constitution," wrote Blanche, referring to the section of the U.S. Constitution that lays out presidential powers, including the authority to appoint people to federal offices. CBS News has reached out to Kinsella for comment.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-department-fires-u-s-attorney-in-new-york-hours-after-judges-picked-him-for-the-job/

---

"Judges don't pick U.S. Attorneys, [the president] does. See Article II of our Constitution," wrote Blanche

Hey jackass, HERE is what "Article II" says that you left out -

Article II

(snip)

Section 2.

(snip)

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The SENATE (that same one from Article I) did NOT approve the nominee, so there is a process to put someone in that position to keep things moving. YOU are violating that.

[mysteryowl]

1. This must prep for midterms

The maga criminal leader wants to control as many state US attorney's as possible.
Minnesota's US attorney office has been completely gutted.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

2. Deadline Legal Blog-How Todd Blanche's 'You are fired' post against a New York prosecutor ignores the law

The former Trump defense lawyer and current high-ranking DOJ official made a legal statement that risks misleading the public.

How Todd Blanche’s ‘You are fired’ post against a New York prosecutor ignores the law www.ms.now/deadline-whi... The former Trump defense lawyer and current high-ranking DOJ official made a legal statement that risks misleading the public.

— timethiefmedia - Canadian forever🍁conservative never (@timethiefmedia.bsky.social) 2026-02-12T20:41:19.058Z

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/todd-blanche-fired-new-york-prosecutor-donald-kinsella-law-constitution

The Trump Justice Department’s second-ranking official, Todd Blanche, wrote Wednesday night on social media: “Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does. See Article II of our Constitution. You are fired, Donald Kinsella.”

Link to tweet

....It’s true that judges aren’t generally involved in the appointment of U.S. attorneys. The typical process is that those top prosecutors are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

But the Trump administration has tried to avoid that normal process, instead seeking to string together temporary stints of loyalists eager to carry out the president’s plans without Senate approval. That has led judges to get involved by way of a federal law that says that when an appointment expires, “the district court for such district may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.”

So, contrary to the implication of Blanche’s post, judges sometimes do have a role to play — not because they’re randomly intervening, but because the law says so.

Now, what’s this about Blanche’s reference to Article II of the Constitution?....

But looking at the text of that constitutional provision, it says that Congress “may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” Applying that text to the federal law giving judges appointment power when there are U.S. attorney vacancies, Congress would seem to have given that power to the courts in this situation.....

Also, judges in other districts have used that power to appoint prosecutors who were initially backed by Trump, including Jay Clayton in the Southern District of New York, whom Attorney General Pam Bondi tasked with investigating Democrats’ ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Therefore, the administration might not want to upend that judicial authority completely, even if it can.

Zooming out, all this appointment drama stems from the administration’s inability or unwillingness to pick lawyers who can get through the confirmation process. As with much else these days, a more measured approach to start with would make drawn-out litigation unnecessary. But that’s not how this administration rolls, as it prioritizes attempting to use the DOJ as another one of the president’s personal tools.

[Igel]

3. That was the predicted outcome.

Admin wants one person or kind of person. Judge cites law and removes that person; the courts can appoint another.

But the admin still can fire that person because, well, the admin has that authority under the law. So the way is open for another interim person.

Rinse, repeat.


Yes, the Senate could approve a nominee-or reject the nominee so that it's clear another nomination is required. But that's not how this game is played because the state's senators can prevent the nominee's consideration. Meaning that what's left is either the admin appoints a person that they don't want or the admin appoints an interim person. Who will 'age out' and be removed by the courts .... etc., etc.