SoCal's Top Prosecutor In Position Illegally, Judge Rules

LOS ANGELES, CA— A federal judge ruled this week that Republican Bill Essayli is not legally serving as the top U.S. prosecutor in Southern California.

The ruling by Judge Michael Seabright means that Essayli, a Trump appointee and former Inland Empire assemblyman, will not be able to try or supervise attorneys working on criminal cases.

It's the latest blow to a prosecutor who also made headlines this week for his efforts to prevent California from counting ballots cast by about 20,000 voters identified by the U.S. Department of Justice as being noncitizens.

Seabright concluded Tuesday that Essayli was not legally serving as U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, writing that he "is unlawfully serving as a 'de facto' United States Attorney."

The ruling presents another obstacle to the Trump administration's strategy of extending acting U.S. attorneys' appointments beyond the 120-day limit established by federal law, a process intended to ensure Senate involvement in permanent appointments.

The dispute over his appointment centers on federal law governing acting U.S. attorneys and the Senate's role in confirming presidential nominees. The administration's efforts to extend acting appointments have faced legal challenges over whether the process circumvents those confirmation requirements. Several of the president's appointees have had little to no prosecutorial experience. Some served on his personal legal team or spent their careers as politicians.

Essayli is a former federal prosecutor and Republican state lawmaker. In the Legislature, he took up conservative causes and criticized the state’s COVID-19 restrictions. He has been outspoken against California policies to protect immigrants living in the country illegally, and he has aggressively prosecuted people who protest Trump’s ramped up immigration enforcement across Southern California.

Essayli previously served in the California State Assembly from 2022 to 2025, representing the 63rd District, which included communities in western Riverside County. A Republican, he was the first Muslim elected to the state Assembly.

The former state lawmaker was appointed by the Trump administration last year to serve as Acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles. Just before the 120-day mark, then-U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed him as First Assistant U.S. Attorney.

But in October 2025, Seabright disqualified Essayli from overseeing several criminal cases, concluding he had stayed in the temporary job longer than allowed by law. He was allowed to continue to serve as a First Assistant U.S. attorney.

The administration never appointed another acting U.S. attorney, effectively making Essayli the top prosecutor.

The administration never appointed another acting U.S. attorney, effectively making Essayli the top prosecutor. He’s been a face of the administration’s sparring with California on everything from alleged health care fraud to recent claims of widespread noncitizen voting. California has pushed back on federal efforts to prevent election officials from counting ballots of up to 20,000 people the Trump administration suspects are not U.S. citizens.

On Tuesday, Seabright wrote that Essayli's status faced new questions following an August appeals court ruling in a similar case. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sigal Chattah, the Trump administration’s initial pick for U.S. attorney in Nevada, was unlawfully appointed to lead federal prosecutions in the state.

Seabright wrote that Bondi’s appointment of Essayli as a special attorney and designation of him as the FAUSA “is identical” to her appointment of Chattah in the same roles.

Despite a new designation by U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche that cut a few of Essayli’s duties, the judge said that “nothing in the revised designation order materially distinguishes it from the Chattah designation order deemed improper in" the appeals court ruling.

Judges have found a number of interim U.S. attorneys installed by the administration are unlawfully serving in their positions.

The order will not take effect until the court rules on the government’s request to pause the decision while it appeals.

Essayli rejected the ruling and defended the administration's authority to appoint Justice Department supervisors.

"The president and attorney general have every right to select supervisors within the Justice Department," Essayli said in a statement Tuesday. "Ultimately, this question will be decided by the Supreme Court, and I look forward to serving in my current role until then."

Essayli also vowed to continue the administration's legal fight over California ballots.

"The district court denied our emergency request to sequester ballots from 20,000 suspected noncitizens," he said in a separate statement Tuesday. "Every day, more ballots are processed by election officials. This ongoing emergency disenfranchises American citizens through dilution."

Essayli said the solicitor general had authorized an immediate appeal and that his office had filed a notice of appeal and would seek emergency relief from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Justice Department's lawsuit seeks to require California to set aside ballots from approximately 20,000 voters it contends are likely noncitizens and verify their eligibility before counting their votes.

California election officials have challenged the reliability of the federal government's data and argued that the requested verification process is logistically unworkable. They have warned that the effort could disenfranchise eligible U.S. citizens and undermine confidence in election results.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter rejected the administration's latest effort to force California to immediately set aside the ballots.

Carter warned that the requested emergency action "would wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway, create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United States citizens."

An appeals court also issued an initial ruling Monday against the Justice Department's effort to set aside the votes.

The legal battles have drawn criticism from democracy and law experts, who say noncitizen voting is rare and have questioned the department's aggressive pursuit of cases involving voter eligibility.

Last week, Essayli's office charged 13 green card holders accused of unlawfully registering to vote. Essayli also has warned election officials that anyone who knowingly processes a ballot cast by a noncitizen could face legal consequences.

Judges have scrutinized actions by his office involving allegations of civil rights violations and heavy-handed enforcement tactics.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.