Maurene Comey’s Lawsuit Raises Alarms Over Wrongful Termination in Federal Employment
In a high-profile case that’s drawing national scrutiny, Maurene Comey, a career federal prosecutor and daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Justice, the Executive Office of the President, and other agencies for what she claims was an unlawful and unconstitutional termination from her role as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York (SDNY).
Comey alleges that her firing on July 16, 2025, was a politically motivated act of retaliation — based not on her own performance, but on her familial connection to her father, a longtime critic of former President Donald Trump. Her lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, could have far-reaching implications for federal employees and civil service protections.
The Basis of Comey’s Wrongful Termination Lawsuit
The complaint, spanning multiple constitutional and statutory claims, asserts that Ms. Comey was terminated:
- Without prior notice
- Without cause or performance-based rationale
- Without due process
- In violation of the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA)
- In retaliation for her familial association and perceived political beliefs
The email terminating her employment cited only "Article II of the Constitution", which outlines the President’s executive authority. No misconduct or policy violation was identified.
Four Legal Theories Strengthening Her Claim
1. Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) Violations
The CSRA is designed to protect career federal employees from politically motivated terminations. It explicitly prohibits adverse actions taken for personal favoritism, political affiliation, or retaliation. Comey alleges that her dismissal occurred in direct violation of these protections, with no performance-based justification.
2. First Amendment Retaliation
The lawsuit claims Comey was targeted for her associational ties to her father, not her own conduct. If proven, this could support a First Amendment violation — particularly since government employees cannot be punished based on the protected speech or affiliations of others.
3. Fifth Amendment Due Process Claims
Comey claims she had a property interest in continued employment, supported by her decade-long tenure and “Outstanding” performance evaluations. Terminating her without advance notice or opportunity to respond could violate procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment.
4. Separation of Powers & Article II Misuse
The lawsuit challenges the DOJ’s reliance on Article II to bypass statutory removal procedures. Comey’s legal team argues that the executive branch cannot override protections enacted by Congress — especially those governing the federal workforce.
A Distinguished Career Cut Short
The complaint outlines a decade of acclaimed service. Comey:
- Prosecuted high-profile cases involving Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Robert Hadden, and Sean "Diddy" Combs
- Supervised major federal investigations, including public corruption cases and RICO trials
- Earned repeated DOJ promotions and national awards for superior performance
Notably, she was asked to lead another public corruption trial just one day before her dismissal.
Implications for Federal Employment Law
This lawsuit is more than a high-profile dispute — it poses constitutional questions that may reshape how civil servants are treated under future administrations:
- Can Article II authority override legislative protections for career employees?
- Do public employees have recourse when terminated based on the speech or conduct of family members?
- How strong are procedural protections when no formal cause is cited?
Conclusion
Maurene Comey’s case underscores a critical issue in employment law: even at the highest levels of government, civil servants have legal protections against politically motivated terminations. The outcome may set precedent for how far executive authority can reach — and how robust the rights of federal employees remain.
At McGonigle Law, we represent clients throughout California in wrongful termination and retaliation claims — including cases involving public employers. If you believe your rights have been violated, contact us today to review your case.
