A federal judge has abruptly shut down the criminal proceedings targeting James Comey and Letitia James, ruling that the Justice Department had no legal basis to install the prosecutor who brought the charges at President Donald Trump’s demand. The decision instantly halted the prosecutions and signaled a major judicial rebuke of the administration’s attempt to handpick an inexperienced loyalist to helm a premier federal office.
U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie’s ruling concluded that Lindsey Halligan’s appointment was unlawful, making her the latest Trump-backed prosecutor removed for the same reason. Though both defendants pleaded for the cases to be dismissed with prejudice, which would have permanently blocked any future prosecution, the judge opted for dismissal without prejudice. For now, there is no clear indication of whether the Justice Department will attempt to resurrect the indictments.
The dispute over Halligan’s appointment was only one front in a broader attack by both Comey and James. Each has accused the Justice Department of mounting politically driven prosecutions, and Comey’s team separately flagged significant issues in the grand jury process. Those arguments, still unresolved, have not yet been addressed by the court.
Monday’s ruling focused solely on the way the Trump administration installed Halligan—who previously served as a White House aide and had never worked as a prosecutor—to run an elite U.S. attorney’s office. Her elevation occurred after Erik Siebert, then interim U.S. attorney, was effectively pushed out following pressure from the administration to bring charges against Trump’s adversaries.
Comey’s lawyers argued that once Siebert resigned, the judges of the district alone had authority to name a replacement. Instead, Trump tapped Halligan while openly urging Bondi on social media to move against his critics, posting, “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” Just days later, prosecutors indicted Comey on obstruction of Congress and false-statement charges, and James was soon accused of mortgage-related wrongdoing.
Reacting to the dismissal, James said, “I am heartened by today’s victory and grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the country.” She added, “I remain fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”
Federal judges in multiple districts—including New Jersey, Los Angeles, and Nevada—have also ruled that interim U.S. attorneys appointed under similar circumstances were improperly installed, though cases in those jurisdictions were allowed to continue. Attorneys for Comey and James insisted that the situation here was more extreme, as Halligan alone signed and propelled the indictments.
Comey has long been one of Trump’s most persistent foes. Appointed in 2013 during President Barack Obama’s administration, he was leading the FBI’s probe into potential coordination between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia. Trump removed him in May 2017, triggering years of public friction and political combat between the two men.
{Matzav.com}
As the Knesset prepares to renew deliberations on the proposed draft law in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, a senior Chareidi official involved in the negotiations is revealing what he calls the real picture behind the emerging legislation. According to him, the current draft will not result in additional Chareidi enlistment — and is unlikely to withstand a legal challenge.
The source explained that the framework being discussed is designed to preserve the existing situation, not change it. “The current version of the law won’t bring more Chareidim into the IDF over the next two years,” he said. “Out of the target of 10,000 Chareidi recruits over two years, the requirement is only to reach 75%, and 10% of that can be national service. In other words, sanctions won’t apply unless recruitment falls below 75% of the targets.”
He noted that the proposal essentially formalizes the status quo. “The new draft law is an attempt to create wording that ensures what was is what will be. Everyone understands it won’t pass judicial review. The law will recruit the same number of Chareidim as today, when there is no law at all — around 3,000 a year.”
For that reason, the official believes the legislation is unlikely to survive scrutiny in the High Court of Justice. Its primary purpose, he said, is political: to show that efforts are being made to regulate the status of yeshiva students. “The law is very likely not going to pass, and even if it passes, it won’t survive the High Court. Attias drafted the law so he can show the rabbonim that real steps were taken to fix the situation — maybe it will even bring us back into the government, with or without actual legislation.”
He added that discussions could still take a sharp turn once the committee begins its formal debate. One scenario under consideration stems from the committee’s legal adviser, who has proposed significantly raising the first-year recruitment requirement. “If the demand increases to 7,500 in the first year, then we would really have to bring in another 1,500 Chareidim immediately,” the senior official said.
{Matzav.com}
An emotional scene unfolded during the Satmar Rebbe’s visit to the Or HaGanuz community near Meron, where he had gone to perform the mitzvah of separating terumos umaasros from the past year’s wine at the local winery. What appeared to be a routine stop on his trip revealed a hidden act of generosity that even his closest associates did not anticipate.
During the visit, the Rebbe met with members of the Badatz of the Eidah HaChareidis in Yerushalayim. At the height of the gathering, as those present watched in silence, the Rebbe unexpectedly reached into his pocket and pulled out a sealed envelope. Inside was a staggering check: one million dollars.
The Rebbe handed the envelope to Badatz member Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Ullman. The purpose of the donation was explicit — the funds were to be distributed among “mosdos al taharas hakodesh in Eretz Yisroel,” institutions that operate with strict adherence to their principles and refuse to accept any financial support from the Israeli government.
The gesture was so discreet and so sudden that even those closest to the Rebbe had been completely unaware. Only after leaving Yerushalayim did he decide to make the unprecedented gift, with no publicity, no ceremonial welcome, and none of the honorific events that typically accompany donations of such scale.
Rav Ullman, visibly shocked by the enormity of both the sum and the Rebbe’s modesty, expressed his astonishment. “In all the years that I have sat on the beis din hagadol, I have seen that anyone who gives a sum like one million dollars to mosdos al taharas hakodesh, the event itself — the ceremony — usually costs another two million dollars!”
He added, “And here, for the first time, someone gave such an amount — with no ceremony, no event, no expectation of recognition.”
The Rebbe requested that the distribution of the money take place only once he had returned to the United States, and specifically close to Chanukah, emphasizing that he did not want to be in Eretz Yisroel when the funds were handed out.
{Matzav.com}
A newly installed elevator was completed last week at the home of Rav Berel Povarsky, senior member of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah and rosh yeshivas Ponovezh, just hours before leading Gedolei Yisroel arrived for a late-Thursday-night gathering.
On Thursday night, Rav Dov Landau and Rav Moshe Hillel Hirsch convened at Rav Povarsky’s home on Ben Zakai Street in Bnei Brak. For the first time, the visiting roshei yeshiva did not need to climb the steep staircase that has long led to the apartment.
Earlier that day, a brief ceremony was held to affix a mezuzah to the entrance of the new elevator that now leads directly into Rav Povarsky’s home.
For years, Rav Povarsky was required to ascend the building’s stairs each time he returned home, a task that had become increasingly difficult. His devoted talmidim and close confidants resolved to install an elevator for the Rosh Yeshiva and the Rebbetzin, funded generously by donors.
With construction completed at the end of last week, Rav Povarsky asked his talmid, the noted posek Rav Yehuda Aryeh Dinner, rov of Central Bnei Brak, to clarify the halachic requirements regarding where to place the mezuzah. After weighing several considerations, Rav Dinner issued a ruling, and the mezuzah was affixed only a few hours before the arrival of the Gedolei Yisroel.
During the gathering at Rav Povarsky’s home, several fundraising efforts were conducted. Afterwards, the Gedolei Yisroel spoke privately, reviewing the current draft-law proposal.
Before departing, the roshei yeshiva addressed the crowd that had assembled in the apartment. They reassured the public that the new draft legislation “will not harm those who are truly devoted to learning Torah.”
{Matzav.com}
A new guide from Australian early-childhood specialists has ignited fresh controversy by proposing that parents treat diaper changes as an opportunity to practice consent — even with infants who can’t yet speak, the NY Post reports. The advice challenges long-standing assumptions about what a routine cleanup should look like.
The researchers argue that parents should announce what they’re about to do and give the baby a chance to absorb the message. As they put it: “At the start of a nappy change, ensure your child knows what is happening. Get down to their level and say, ‘You need a nappy change,’ and then pause so they can take this in.”
The recommendation is part of a November 2025 guide published by Deakin University, which urges caregivers to rethink the speed and style with which they approach this otherwise hectic task. The team suggests slowing down and treating the process as an early lesson in bodily awareness rather than something to “just get done.”
Their guidance goes beyond giving a heads-up. Parents are encouraged to frame diaper time as a dialogue — even if the child cannot respond. “Then you can say, ‘Do you want to walk [or] crawl with me to the [changing] table, or would you like me to carry you?’” the researchers advise, adding, “Observe their facial expressions and body language to check if they understand what is happening.”
From their perspective, this moment can teach fundamental ideas about autonomy. “This can be a time to help children learn about consent and how their bodies work,” they explain.
The Deakin team also proposes involving babies physically during the process, prompting them with statements like, “Can you please lift up your bottom so I can slide your nappy out?” They insist that “These habits plant the seed of the idea that a child has the right to say what happens to their body.”
Child-development professionals in the United States told The NY Post that while infants can’t converse, narrating actions is still meaningful. Yamalis Diaz, a clinical child psychologist at NYU Langone Health, says parents can use diaper changes to normalize conversations about privacy and boundaries long before children develop language. “This is more about integrating the teaching of consent into the [adult’s] parenting practices early on,” Diaz said. “It’s aimed at increasing the parents’ awareness of all the ways that the need for consent occurs in a child’s life.”
Diaz adds that starting early helps ensure such conversations remain “part of the conversations throughout early development,” making boundary-setting more natural. “Parents and kids will be more comfortable talking about and establishing boundaries,” she said.
NYC psychotherapist Lesley Koeppel echoes that sentiment. “Babies cannot verbally agree or disagree, but parents can still narrate what they are doing,” she told The Post. “This builds a foundation for bodily autonomy long before a child has language.” She stresses, though, that these exchanges should be understood symbolically: “The validity of this approach lies in its message. You matter. Your body matters. I will always tell you what I am doing.” According to her, that message “becomes the template for healthy boundaries later in life.”
The Deakin researchers warn that traditional diaper-changing habits — such as entertaining the child with toys or songs — may blur a child’s perception of what is happening to their body during an intimate task. “It’s important children notice when someone is touching their most intimate parts,” they state, encouraging parents to keep the moment grounded and consistent. “Even in early infancy, children can respond to consistent verbal cues,” they add, recommending that parents maintain familiar language and stable routines.
They also urge the use of anatomically correct terminology when cleaning or bathing a child. “Parents may feel uncomfortable doing this and think more childish names should be used,” they acknowledge. “But this keeps children safe, as it means they can then inform trusted adults about their experiences with all the people who care for them.”
Despite the criticism the advice has drawn, the authors insist the intention is to lighten, not increase, the burden on parents. “The habits we outline above may also seem to add more work to the already demanding parental load,” they concede. “So try and do them as often as possible and be kind to yourself if every nappy change isn’t a perfect moment of connection.”
“You are supporting a small child after all.”
{Matzav.com}
