Prosecutor leaves Comey case as trial faces constitutional challenges

The Justice Department’s decision to remove Matthew Petracca from the James Comey case adds a new layer of pressure to a prosecution already heading into constitutional fights. A Friday filing replaced Petracca, the lone assistant U.S. attorney from the Eastern District of North Carolina on the case, with Timothy Severo and gave no explanation for the switch.

That change matters because Petracca had been the lawyer carrying the district’s role in a case built around Comey’s May 15, 2025 Instagram post showing seashells arranged to read “86 47.” Federal prosecutors say the post amounted to a threat against President Donald Trump, and a grand jury in the Eastern District of North Carolina returned a two-count indictment on April 28, 2026. The filing does not alter the charges, but it does change who will have to defend them as the defense prepares motions attacking the case on constitutional grounds.

Comey’s trial, originally set for earlier, was pushed to October 21, 2026, after U.S. District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan granted his request for more time. His lawyers said they needed additional time to prepare constitutional challenges, and Comey has said he has “complete faith” in the judicial system while maintaining his innocence.

The personnel shift is striking because Petracca was not just any member of the team. NBC News reported that he was a former Republican county committeeman in New Jersey and a recently hired prosecutor under U.S. Attorney W. Ellis Boyle. Other reporting said Petracca had considered leaving the Justice Department entirely, raising questions about whether his departure reflected internal discomfort with the case or broader career plans. The filing offered no answer.

The case itself has drawn unusual scrutiny. Legal experts have said the use of “86” is common restaurant slang and does not necessarily carry a violent meaning, making the Trump administration’s threat theory look aggressive and politically charged. The prosecution also comes after an earlier Comey case was dismissed on procedural grounds tied to the authority of the U.S. attorney, which has intensified attention on whether this new effort can survive pretrial challenges.

For now, the practical effect is limited but important: the indictment remains in place, the October 21 trial date still stands, and the defense is preparing to test the case’s constitutional footing before a jury ever hears it. The unanswered question is whether the Justice Department’s decision to replace its only local prosecutor signals routine housekeeping, or a deeper wobble in confidence.