VIRGINIA — In a significant development, a federal grand jury in Virginia has once again declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James over alleged mortgage fraud. The latest rejection, following a similar outcome last week in Norfolk, marks the second time in recent days that grand jurors have refused to approve charges against James.
The grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, located in Alexandria, was presented with allegations that James misled a bank in 2020 to secure favorable loan terms on her home mortgage by falsely declaring the property as a second home rather than an investment property. Prosecutors argued that this misrepresentation allowed James to obtain a more favorable mortgage rate, potentially saving her $19,000 over the life of the loan.
However, the grand jury rejected the charges, echoing the decision made by a grand jury in Norfolk just one week earlier. The rejection of the charges is seen as a significant blow to federal prosecutors who have been attempting to revive the case after a previous grand jury indictment was dismissed by a federal judge. The judge had ruled the earlier indictment was based on the unlawful appointment of the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Legal Response and Public Reactions
James’ attorney, Abbe Lowell, responded strongly to the decision, calling the rejection “unprecedented” and asserting that the charges should never have been pursued. In a statement, Lowell emphasized that two separate grand juries in different cities had rejected the charges, calling the case “baseless” and accusing the Department of Justice of wasting resources on an investigation that had no merit.
“This makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day,” Lowell stated. “Career prosecutors who knew better refused to bring it, and now two different grand juries in two different cities have refused to allow these baseless charges to be brought.”
Details of the Allegations and Investigation
The Department of Justice had alleged that James intentionally misrepresented the nature of the property she purchased in 2020 in order to save money on her mortgage terms. Prosecutors claimed that by listing the home as a second home instead of an investment property, James was able to secure a more favorable mortgage rate, thereby reducing her costs.
However, ABC News previously reported that the investigation into James’ mortgage application uncovered evidence that seemed to undermine some of the allegations. The evidence reportedly indicated that the personal financial benefit James received from the purchase may have been less than originally claimed.
James has consistently denied all allegations of wrongdoing, stating that her actions were legitimate and proper. She has defended her conduct, claiming that she acted in good faith when purchasing the property.
Implications for Future Legal Actions
Despite the repeated rejections by grand juries, federal prosecutors could still attempt to pursue charges in the future, although such a move now seems increasingly unlikely. The decision by two grand juries to reject the charges raises questions about the strength of the case against James and may signal that the allegations lack sufficient evidence to proceed further.
James, who gained national prominence for her successful civil fraud case against now-President Donald Trump, has emerged unscathed from this latest legal challenge, which has only served to bolster her position. She remains a key figure in New York state politics and legal circles, having taken a prominent role in a variety of high-profile cases.
As of now, the Department of Justice has not made any official comment following the grand jury’s latest decision.
This story may be updated with more information as it becomes available.
