Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia appointed by President Donald Trump, privately contacted a journalist via encrypted messaging about an active federal prosecution, in what legal analysts describe as a breach of long-standing professional norms.
Lawfare journalist Anna Bower reported on Monday that Halligan sent her a message through the Signal app on 11 October, introducing herself directly. Bower verified the sender’s identity by cross-checking Halligan’s publicly listed number and confirming shared details from their first meeting.
Over the following 33 hours, Halligan continued to message Bower regarding the ongoing case against New York Attorney General Letitia James. According to Bower, Halligan criticised aspects of her reporting, including summaries based on The New York Times, and referred to matters involving a grand jury—while noting she could not disclose confidential information.
Bower stated that Halligan never indicated their exchange was off the record. In one message, Halligan wrote: “Continue to do what you have been and you’ll be completely discredited when the evidence comes out.”
Bower said she was unsure what Halligan claimed had been reported inaccurately or why the prosecutor had contacted her directly.
Editors at Lawfare said they could not recall a U.S. attorney personally initiating contact with a reporter about an active case, a practice generally handled by press officers or communications staff.
The nature of the exchange—informal messages about a live case, mention of grand jury details, and self-initiated outreach—has drawn concern from former Justice Department officials and media professionals.
Halligan replaced Erik Siebert, who was also appointed by Trump but reportedly declined to pursue the case against James. Her appointment and the subsequent prosecution have been criticised by opponents as politically motivated.
Legal commentators said the incident raises three central questions: whether the prosecution remains insulated from political influence, whether grand jury secrecy is being maintained, and whether standard communication protocols have been bypassed.
While the messages do not alone demonstrate misconduct, they underscore tensions between prosecutorial independence and political loyalty. Analysts note that Halligan, a former insurance attorney with no prior prosecutorial experience, represents an unconventional appointment to such a senior role.
The Justice Department and Halligan’s office have not issued a public statement regarding the exchange.