Former FBI director James Comey is fighting a federal prosecution tied to a seashell photo, arguing the case violates his free speech rights while his team pushes for grand jury disclosure amid claims the charges break long-standing DOJ norms.
James Comey’s lawyers have filed motions in North Carolina asking a judge to throw out the indictment accusing him of threatening the president. They argue moving forward would trample Comey’s First Amendment protections and that the prosecution is not rooted in a good-faith application of the law.
Comey’s legal team says the case reflects an escalation in political prosecutions and has asked the court to release grand jury records to look for irregularities. The team contends that the circumstances surrounding the indictment overcome the normal presumption of secrecy around grand jury proceedings.
On Tuesday, members of Comey’s eight-person legal team filed a motion asking a judge to toss the seashells case, saying it is “not based on a good-faith application of the law to the facts; instead, it effectuates a yearslong campaign by the President to use the criminal process to punish Mr. Comey for his protected speech and because of the President’s deep-seated animosity.”
The Trump-driven case must be cast aside “under two bedrock legal doctrines,” they said: that the case was instigated based on Comey’s protected speech and that the government engaged in selective prosecution.
“Dismissal of federal criminal charges under these doctrines has historically been rare. That is because for decades the DOJ’s independence and integrity have guarded against the use of the criminal process to punish enemies or settle political scores,” they wrote. “The prosecutions of Mr. Comey mark a sharp break from that tradition.”
Comey’s team also filed a separate motion Tuesday seeking the disclosure of grand jury records in the case, arguing that while “grand jury proceedings are typically entitled to a presumption of regularity, the irregularities surrounding the return of the indictment in this case overcome that presumption.”
Comey’s team had already argued Monday that the seashells case should be tossed because Comey’s Instagram post was not a true threat, arguing that “dictionaries, context, precedent, and common sense” gut the Trump administration’s claims about the meaning of the numbers “8647.”
A Justice Department official who was not authorized to discuss the case previously told NBC News that the case was a “complete loser” and a “waste of resources” and predicted that it would be tossed before trial. “No reasonable person could believe that Comey intended to threaten the president via seashells,” the person said. “Everyone at this DOJ should be ashamed. I know I am.”
The underlying incident dates to May 2025, when Comey posted a photo of seashells arranged to read “86 47” on a North Carolina beach with the caption, “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.” Prosecutors say the arrangement signaled a threat to President Trump, interpreting “86” as slang for getting rid of someone and “47” as a reference to the 47th president.
Comey deleted the post soon after and said he “didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence” while emphasizing that he “oppose[s] violence of any kind so I took the post down.” That statement remains part of the public record as the defense presses its free speech claim.
https://x.com/JosephC11969332/status/2082229007060214244
A federal grand jury in North Carolina returned an indictment on April 28, 2026, charging Comey with knowingly making a threat against the president and transmitting that threat across state lines. Comey responded to the indictment on video, saying, “Well, they’re back. This time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. And this won’t be the end of it, but nothing has changed with me. I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So, let’s go.”
Comey’s attorney Patrick Fitzgerald stated, “We will contest these charges in the courtroom and look forward to vindicating Mr. Comey and the First Amendment.” That defense strategy combines constitutional arguments with procedural requests aimed at exposing how the indictment was obtained.
The case sits against a backdrop of long-running animus between Comey and Donald Trump that stretches back to Comey’s firing as FBI director in 2017. That feud has included public denunciations, a critical memoir by Comey, and repeated attacks from Trump, who told reporters the seashells post “meant assassination.”
This dispute now tests how courts balance alleged political motivations, the limits of political speech, and ordinary criminal standards. The judge will have to weigh First Amendment arguments, claims of selective prosecution, and whether grand jury secrecy should yield to demands for transparency in this high-profile matter.
