Court appoints Rogoff as U.S. attorney in Seattle—then Trump fires him

On July 15, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington issued a general order appointing Roger Scott Rogoff as U.S. attorney for Western Washington under 28 U.S.C. § 546(d). Hours later, President Trump fired Rogoff, escalating a separation-of-powers dispute over who controls federal prosecutor leadership when a U.S. attorney seat is vacant.

What the court’s order did

The General Order issued by the Western District appointed Rogoff using the vacancy-filling authority the order cites under 28 U.S.C. § 546(d). The court’s public announcement directs readers to the attached order, which lays out the statutory basis for the appointment tied to the district’s vacancy.

What happened after—Trump’s firing

According to Associated Press and CBS News, Trump fired Rogoff the same day as the court’s appointment, with the firing coming within hours. The fast sequence has turned a personnel dispute into an institutional fight likely to generate additional filings and legal arguments over the scope of court involvement during U.S. attorney vacancies.

Why 28 U.S.C. § 541 is central to the fight

Section 541 addresses two key features of U.S. attorney leadership: presidential appointment by and with Senate advice and consent, and removal by the President. In a vacancy context, the legal question becomes how (and whether) court appointment authority under § 546(d) can operate when the President exercises removal authority under § 541 almost immediately.

Who is affected locally—and what to watch next

For people in Western Washington, the immediate impact is tied to who leads the U.S. attorney’s office that oversees federal prosecutions in the district. Beyond day-to-day operations, the broader impact is about procedure and authority: if courts and the White House keep moving quickly in opposite directions, expect more attention from appellate courts on how vacancy-filling and removal power interact.

• Whether Rogoff or the court challenges the firing, and how quickly any dispute reaches higher courts.
• Whether DOJ/White House officials announce who will run the office next while the legal fight proceeds.
• Whether additional guidance or orders clarify future vacancy steps under the competing statutory frameworks.

The case is already showing how power disputes in federal staffing can move from the courthouse to the White House in a single day—and then into the courts again.

Sources

• Western District of Washington General Order 09-26 (Appointment Order, July 15, 2026)
• Associated Press: Trump fires Roger Rogoff after court appointment
• 28 U.S.C. § 541 (United States attorneys)