Why Roger Rogoff is back as Seattle’s U.S. attorney after Trump fired him

Roger Rogoff was reinstated as U.S. attorney for Western Washington by a federal judge in Seattle on October 1, 2026, after President Donald Trump fired him in July. The preliminary injunction restores his authority to lead the federal prosecutors’ office because, in the judge’s view, the president cannot unilaterally remove a prosecutor appointed by district judges.

Rogoff had been fired less than an hour after taking his oath on July 15. Now Judge Stanley Bastian has ordered his immediate return, according to independent courtroom reports from KUOW and Courthouse News. The Justice Department told KUOW: “We disagree with the decision and intend to seek an immediate stay and will appeal.”

Why the judge reinstated Roger Rogoff

The central distinction is how Rogoff got the job. He was selected by the district’s judges, rather than installed through presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. Bastian concluded that the removal provision invoked by the administration applies to prosecutors appointed through that nomination-and-confirmation process, Courthouse News reported. The administration disputes that reading.

“The president cannot unilaterally fire a United States attorney appointed by the district court,” Bastian said from the bench, according to Courthouse News. His reasoning was that allowing such removals would undermine the appointment framework and reduce the incentive for a president to nominate someone the Senate would confirm.

How district judges can appoint a U.S. attorney

Federal law provides more than one route into the office. Section 541 establishes presidential appointment with the Senate’s advice and consent. A separate vacancy provision, section 546, allows the attorney general to appoint an interim U.S. attorney while the position is vacant.

That interim appointment lasts until a presidentially appointed successor qualifies or 120 days expire, whichever comes first. If the 120-day limit is reached, the district court may appoint a U.S. attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled. That is the statutory route the judges used for Rogoff.

Their July 15 appointment order records a unanimous selection and makes Rogoff’s appointment effective immediately. It authorizes him to serve until a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed officer fills the vacancy. The order identifies Nicholas W. Brown as the district’s last Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney and dates Brown’s resignation to June 21, 2023.

The same order describes the U.S. attorney as the district’s chief federal law-enforcement officer. Rogoff’s experience includes work as a King County prosecutor, an assistant U.S. attorney in Seattle, a King County Superior Court judge and director of Washington’s Office of Independent Investigations.

Why the Trump administration disputes the ruling

The administration relies on section 541’s statement that “Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.” Its position is that this includes court-appointed prosecutors. According to KUOW’s account of government filings, officials accepted the district court’s authority to appoint Rogoff; the dispute was over who could remove him.

Justice Department attorney Joshua Ha argued that the president needs removal authority to ensure executive officers follow presidential direction and retain his confidence. Government filings also warned that Rogoff’s interpretation would leave judicially appointed prosecutors unaccountable, KUOW reported.

Rogoff’s side answered that appointing judges could remove their appointee in an urgent case of malfeasance. His lawyer Hailyn Chen also emphasized that ruling for Rogoff would not require a finding that Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys are protected from removal, Courthouse News reported. The case turns on the court-appointed position.

What the injunction changes in Seattle

Courthouse News reported that Bastian barred federal defendants from interfering with or obstructing Rogoff’s ability to perform his duties. KUOW described the ruling as prohibiting his removal until there is a Senate-confirmed replacement. Those accounts establish the reported scope of the preliminary relief.

Rogoff attended the hearing but declined to speak to reporters. His attorneys told KUOW he was going directly to perform his duties at the prosecutors’ office in the same courthouse. That was their stated plan; the report does not independently establish a completed transfer of office responsibilities.

The administration had meanwhile taken other steps to fill the post. Courthouse News reported that Trump nominated Simon Peter Serrano on September 14 and signed a September 25 memorandum directing Charles Floyd to perform the office’s functions. Bastian said Serrano was not U.S. attorney because he had not been confirmed, and rejected Floyd’s asserted authority to hold the position.

What happens next with the appeal and nomination

The Justice Department’s announced stay request and appeal leave the injunction’s durability unresolved. The October 1 reports establish a preliminary ruling and the department’s intentions, not a granted stay or an appellate decision. They also do not establish changes to individual prosecution decisions.

Serrano’s nomination faces a stated political obstacle: Washington Senator Patty Murray said she would seek to block his confirmation, according to KUOW. That does not establish a Senate rejection or an eventual outcome. At the hearing, the distinction remained decisive: a nomination alone had not installed Rogoff’s replacement.