Letitia James Pleads Not Guilty in Shocking Trump-Linked Indictment

In a dramatic courtroom appearance that has reignited national political tensions, New York Attorney General Letitia James pleaded not guilty to federal criminal charges brought by a prosecutor appointed under pressure from former President Donald Trump. The arraignment took place Friday in the Eastern District of Virginia, marking the opening salvo in what legal experts are calling a highly unusual and politically charged prosecution .

What Are the Charges?

James faces serious federal allegations, including bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution. If convicted on all counts, she could face up to 30 years in prison per count, along with fines of up to $1 million per charge and potential asset forfeiture .

The Trump Connection

The indictment stems from actions taken by Lindsey Halligan, the newly installed U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Halligan was appointed after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, resigned—reportedly because he resisted pressure from Trump to pursue charges against James . James has publicly condemned the indictment as politically motivated, calling Halligan’s appointment “unlawful” and part of a broader effort to weaponize the justice system .

Timeline of Events

Date	Event
Early October 2025	Erik Siebert resigns as U.S. Attorney amid reported Trump pressure
October 9, 2025	Grand jury indicts Letitia James on federal fraud charges
October 24, 2025	James pleads not guilty in federal court

Political Fallout and Legal Questions

Critics argue this case represents a dangerous precedent: using federal prosecutorial power to target state officials who have previously investigated Trump. James led a high-profile civil lawsuit that resulted in a $454 million judgment against Trump and his company for fraudulent business practices—a ruling currently under appeal.

Legal scholars are divided. Some warn of executive overreach, while others maintain that if evidence supports the charges, the case should proceed regardless of political context. However, the rushed appointment of Halligan and the jurisdictional choice—Virginia, far from James’s New York base—have raised eyebrows .

What’s Next?

James’s legal team is expected to file motions challenging both the validity of Halligan’s appointment and the venue of the case. A pretrial hearing is likely within weeks. Meanwhile, the case has already become a flashpoint in the 2026 midterm elections, with Democrats framing it as political persecution and Trump allies calling it long-overdue accountability.