Federal Appeals Court Disqualifies Sigal Chattah as Nevada’s U.S. Attorney on August 18
Key Points
Ninth Circuit ruled Chattah's appointment violated federal vacancy law on August 18.
Attorney General cannot create acting U.S. attorney by title manipulation or delegation.
Chattah disqualified from supervising three criminal cases and loses full acting authority.
Trump administration plans Supreme Court appeal of the unanimous three-judge decision.
A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Monday that Sigal Chattah was unlawfully appointed as Nevada’s top federal prosecutor. The court found that the Justice Department violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 by shifting Chattah’s titles to keep her in the role after her interim term expired in July 2025. The ruling disqualifies her from supervising three criminal cases and blocks similar appointment tactics across the federal system.
How the appointment scheme worked
Chattah was appointed interim U.S. attorney effective April 1, 2025, for a maximum 120-day term. The day before that term expired in late July 2025, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi resigned Chattah from the interim role and appointed her as first assistant U.S. attorney. Bondi also designated her as a special attorney. The Justice Department argued this move allowed Chattah to serve as acting U.S. attorney under federal vacancy law, which normally allows the first assistant to assume the acting role when a vacancy occurs.
Why the court rejected the government’s legal strategy
The three-judge panel, composed of two Trump appointees and one Clinton appointee, unanimously held that the Federal Vacancies Reform Act’s automatic succession rule applies only if the first assistant was already in that position when the vacancy arose. Judge Eric Miller wrote that the attorney general cannot “create a de facto Acting U.S. Attorney by delegating all of the functions and duties of the U.S. Attorney to someone else.” The panel ruled the government cannot bypass Senate confirmation through title manipulation.
What happens to Chattah and the criminal cases
Chattah is disqualified from overseeing the three criminal cases that challenged her appointment. She may continue as first assistant U.S. attorney, the second-in-command position, but without the full powers granted to an acting U.S. attorney. The disqualification could affect her ability to oversee other cases as well. The Trump administration plans to appeal to the Supreme Court, according to a Justice Department spokesperson.
Broader implications for federal appointments
This ruling aligns with similar decisions from other federal courts that have rejected the government’s attempts to extend unconfirmed appointees as heads of U.S. Attorney’s Offices. The Washington Litigation Group noted the decision protects the Senate’s constitutional role in confirming U.S. Attorneys. The White House has nominated George Kelesis to permanently replace Chattah, though that confirmation process is ongoing.
Final Thoughts
The Ninth Circuit’s unanimous decision blocks the Trump administration’s strategy of using vacancy law technicalities to bypass Senate confirmation for U.S. Attorneys. Chattah loses supervisory authority over three cases and the full powers of an acting U.S. attorney, though she may remain as first assistant.
FAQs
The court found the Justice Department unlawfully appointed her by shifting her titles to invoke federal vacancy law after her interim term expired, bypassing the Senate confirmation requirement.
Yes, she may remain as first assistant U.S. attorney, the second-in-command position, but without full acting U.S. attorney powers or authority over the three criminal cases.
The 1998 law allows the first assistant to an office to automatically assume the acting role when a vacancy occurs, but only if they already held that position when the vacancy arose.
Yes, the Justice Department stated it plans to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.
Disclaimer:
The content shared by Meyka AI PTY LTD is solely for research and informational purposes. Meyka is not a financial advisory service, and the information provided should not be considered investment or trading advice.
About Author

Danny Kontos
Co FounderDanny Kontos has been a stock investor since 2007 and co-founded Meyka in 2023. He keeps a small, focused portfolio and only moves when the numbers are hard to argue with. He has waited years on a single position before. Before Meyka, he ran a web hosting company and a mortgage lending platform, so he knows what a well-run business actually looks like under the hood. This article did not come from a news cycle. It came from someone who has been watching this space for a long time.
What brings you to Meyka?
Pick what interests you most and we will get you started.
I'm here to read news
Find more articles like this one
I'm here to research stocks
Ask Meyka Analyst about any stock
I'm here to track my Portfolio
Get daily updates and alerts (coming March 2026)