James Comey asks judge to dismiss “seashell ’86” case, says prosecution is selective and vindictive

Former FBI Director James Comey asked a federal judge late Tuesday to dismiss the case against him tied to a photo described as featuring seashells arranged to spell “86 47,” according to a report by The Hill. In the filing, Comey argued the prosecution is selective and vindictive, and he linked the case to President Donald Trump and the U.S. Department of Justice, according to the same report.

Comey’s request to dismiss seeks to overturn the case before trial, contending that the government cannot proceed where the alleged conduct, as he characterizes it, does not support a basis for criminal liability and where he says the charging decision reflects retaliatory motives. The Hill reported that Comey’s motion frames the prosecution as inconsistent with due process because it was allegedly driven by political considerations rather than neutral enforcement of the law.

Separately, a late-night filing also requested a Franks hearing, The Hill reported. A Franks hearing is a procedure used in some criminal cases to challenge whether material statements in affidavits or warrant applications were false, misleading, or made without proper basis, depending on the posture of the case. In this instance, Comey sought review aimed at the foundations for the case, the report said.

The Hill’s report characterizes Comey’s filings as part of a broader attempt to test the evidence and the government’s justification for pursuing the matter. If the judge grants dismissal or grants a Franks hearing, it could change what evidence the case can rely on and potentially narrow or reshape the litigation timeline.

The Department of Justice’s position was not included in the supplied material, and an official court docket or DOJ statement was not provided here. As a result, the case status remains subject to the judge’s response and to any subsequent procedural rulings in the federal court where the motions were filed.

For now, the next step is the court’s consideration of Comey’s dismissal request and his request for a Franks hearing. Depending on what the judge orders, the case could proceed with additional evidentiary litigation or be narrowed, continued, or dismissed.

The underlying dispute in the reported filings is narrow in form but significant in stakes: whether a prosecution grounded in a contested interpretation of a shared image can proceed, and whether the charging decision and supporting materials meet constitutional and procedural requirements.