Seattle’s newest U.S. Attorney experienced an unprecedented turn of events this Wednesday morning, showcasing the lengths of political maneuvering and the fragility of federal appointments.
At precisely 7:40 a.m., Roger Rogoff was officially sworn in as the United States Attorney for the Western District of Washington. Appointed by a panel of seven federal judges—who unanimously selected him after nearly three years without a Senate-confirmed appointee—Rogoff’s appointment was hailed as a significant step forward for justice and independence in the region.
But less than an hour later, Rogoff’s tenure was abruptly cut short. At 8:34 a.m., just 54 minutes after taking the oath, Rogoff received an email from the White House informing him of his removal. The message, branded with the subject line: “A Message From the President,” contained a single line: “The President of the United States has directed that I inform you that, pursuant to his authority, you are hereby removed from the office of the United States Attorney.”
The email did not include a phone call, a meeting, or any prior discussion. Instead, it delivered the news as a cold, official notification—treating a key federal appointment as mere administrative trivia. Rogoff, standing in a Georgetown lobby awaiting a scheduled meeting with the outgoing interim U.S. Attorney, discovered he had been dismissed via email just moments after his swearing-in.
Adding insult to injury, the White House swiftly announced his removal via X (formerly Twitter), with Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal defense lawyer and now acting Attorney General, stating simply: “Roger Rogoff has been fired by the President.”
Many are now questioning the legality and morality of such a swift dismissal. Rogoff’s career spans more than four decades—14 years as a King County prosecutor, six as a federal prosecutor tackling violent crime and gang activity, and seven years as a Superior Court judge. He even led Washington’s first independent office tasked with investigating police killings—a groundbreaking move to curb police self-investigation.
Despite his extensive credentials, Rogoff was appointed under a rare process. When a federal district seat becomes vacant and remains unfilled for an extended period, a panel of federal judges can invoke a specific statute to appoint someone temporarily. In this case, they chose Rogoff, a highly qualified and respected legal professional, with bipartisan support from Senator Patty Murray, who called him “eminently qualified.”
Rogoff’s comments on his firing show his dismay—and perhaps, frustration. “When the judges appoint someone constitutionally and statutorily,” he said, “and they’re summarily dismissed without a conversation, without an examination, and without understanding what they intend to do when they get into office, then yes, I think that firing is not appropriate and is most likely unlawful.”
Now, Rogoff has hired a national law firm and is contemplating legal action against the White House. “They gave me 54 minutes and a form email,” Rogoff stated. “I’m going to give them a lawsuit.”
This episode has raised serious questions about transparency, due process, and the political use of federal appointments. As Rogoff prepares for potential legal battles, many are left to wonder what precedent this sets for future appointments and dismissals at the federal level.
