A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Bill Essayli, the Trump-appointed Acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, has been serving unlawfully in the nation’s largest federal district — the third such finding against a prosecutor installed by President Donald Trump in recent months.
The decision by Judge J. Michael Seabright, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, adds to growing evidence of the Trump’s administration’s defiance of Senate confirmation rules.
“Bilal A. Essayli (“Essayli”) is not lawfully serving as Acting United States Attorney for the Central District of California,” Seabright wrote. “And he has been unlawfully serving in that role since he resigned as Interim United States Attorney.”
Seabright’s opinion found that Essayli’s appointment violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act — the law limiting how long a president can fill top federal posts without Senate confirmation. The court determined that Essayli’s installation amounted to an “end-run” around Congress’ constitutional power to vet and confirm key justice officials.
The ruling mirrors two earlier cases against Trump-appointed U.S. Attorneys, Alina Habba in New Jersey and Sigal Chattah in Nevada, where judges reached the same conclusion that the administration had unlawfully kept unconfirmed appointees in office beyond the FVRA’s 120-day limit.
“Based on the following, the court determines that Essayli unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney,” Seabright found. “He is disqualified from participating in Defendants’ prosecutions as Acting United States Attorney.”
The judge’s opinion underscored why the confirmation process matters, warning that the administration’s tactics threaten to erode the Senate’s constitutional oversight role.
“Recognizing that the Senate’s confirmation power was ‘being undermined as never before,’ Congress enacted the FVRA to ensure that ‘the Constitution’s separation of powers is maintained, and officers of the government are subjected to the scrutiny of the Senate for the benefit of the liberty of the people,’” Seabright added.
Judge Seabright dismissed the Justice Department’s claim that it could lawfully extend Essayli’s tenure through internal reshuffling, calling that interpretation a dangerous overreach.
The court’s decision casts a new light on Essayli’s anti-voting past.
Before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office, he served as a Republican Assemblymember in California, where he championed restrictive “voter ID” measures — policies that voting rights groups warn can disenfranchise voters, particularly in communities of color.
He once said that when he joined the Legislature, “parental rights, illegal immigration, and voter ID were peripheral issues;” but under his influence, “we’ve made them centerpieces of our Party.”
Essayli is also listed as one of the attorneys behind a lawsuit targeting Orange County election officials over access to voter records — a case voting rights advocates have described as part of a broader push to sow distrust in California’s elections.
With Seabright’s ruling now declaring his federal service unlawful, it remains unclear whether his involvement in that case could face new scrutiny or potential challenges.
While the judge declined to dismiss ongoing cases brought by Essayli, the ruling marks another major flashpoint in Trump’s efforts to install unconfirmed loyalists in charge of the Justice Department. With three federal judges now striking down similar appointments, the dangerous pattern is clear.
