← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Rogoff v. Trump

No. 2:26-cv-02566 District · TRO Active

Case Overview

The court-appointed U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington sued after the administration purported to fire him. The office had been vacant since June 2023 with no nominee, and the district court filled it under 28 U.S.C. section 546(d). Rogoff argues that statute is an exercise of Congress-s Appointments Clause power over inferior-officer vacancies, so he serves until a successor is confirmed by the Senate. Counts: ultra vires violation of the Appointments Clause and separation of powers, and a Due Process Clause claim. A preliminary injunction motion was filed the same day with oral argument requested.

CourtU.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
FiledJul 21, 2026
Judge Stanley A. Bastian
CL StatusActive
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

No Supreme Court data for this case.

Don't miss the next one
Subscribe on Substack ↗ Watch on YouTube ↗

Docket

CourtListener ↗
Federal Court Civil TMR-41aab3cf PI motion (Dkt. 8) filed 2026-07-21 with oral argument requested, noting date 2026-08-18. No TRO sought, none entered. Judge Ricardo S. Martinez recused 2026-07-22 (Dkt. 14); case transferred to Judge Stanley A. Bastian, an out-of-district judge designated under 28 U.S.C. § 292(b) per the Ninth Circuit's Dec. 10, 2025 General Designation, because the appointment at issue was made by the W.D. Wash. bench itself. Summonses issued 2026-07-22. No responsive pleading yet. Jul 23, 2026
Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support