Restoring Executive Power To Appoint United States Attorneys Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 31, 2025
Bottom line
This bill shifts the authority for appointing interim United States Attorneys from district courts back to the Executive Branch, ensuring presidential appointees serve until confirmation.
What it actually does
This bill amends federal law to remove the ability of district courts to appoint interim United States Attorneys. Instead, any person appointed to fill a vacancy in the office of a U.S. Attorney will serve until a Presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney qualifies for the position, effectively centralizing interim appointment power within the Executive Branch.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this bill restores the President's constitutional authority over federal law enforcement appointments, ensuring greater accountability and alignment of prosecutorial priorities with the administration's agenda. They may assert that the current system, which allows district courts to appoint interim U.S. Attorneys, infringes on executive power and can lead to inconsistent application of federal law.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that removing the district court's role in interim appointments eliminates an important check and balance, potentially politicizing the U.S. Attorney's office and undermining judicial independence. They may contend that allowing interim appointees to serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation could lead to less accountability and greater executive overreach.
The bill text is extremely short and can be read in under a minute, making it highly accessible for public review.
Section 2, page 1
Amending 28 U.S.C. 546 Regarding Vacancies in U.S. Attorney Offices
This section amends title 28, United States Code, specifically section 546, which governs vacancies in the office of United States Attorney. It strikes existing subsections (c) and (d) and replaces them with a new subsection (c). The new language stipulates that any person appointed as a United States Attorney under this section may serve until a Presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed United States Attorney for that district qualifies. This effectively eliminates the 120-day limit on interim appointments by the Attorney General and the subsequent power of district courts to appoint a U.S. Attorney.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures the President's constitutional authority to oversee federal law enforcement is fully realized, preventing judicial interference in executive appointments. They contend it streamlines the appointment process and ensures that the U.S. Attorney's office aligns with the administration's policy goals.
Critics contend
Critics argue that removing the district court's role eliminates a crucial check on executive power, potentially allowing politically motivated interim appointments to serve indefinitely without the accountability of Senate confirmation. They may raise concerns about the politicization of justice and the erosion of judicial independence.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances executive control over federal law enforcement with concerns about checks and balances and the potential for politicization of justice. It trades the judicial branch's role in ensuring continuity for increased executive authority.