Hold onto your hats, folks -- a federal judge just threw a wrench into the Justice Department’s plans to revisit a criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey with evidence from his close ally, Daniel Richman, as Fox News reports.

In a nutshell, a Washington, D.C.-based court has put a temporary halt on the DOJ using materials from Richman’s electronic devices while it sorts out claims of unlawful searches dating back to 2019 and 2020.

This saga kicked off years ago when prosecutors seized data from Richman’s devices during probes into Comey’s actions, particularly tied to his 2020 testimony before Congress.

Judge Halts DOJ’s Evidence Access

Those files were used to build a case accusing Comey of lying and obstructing Congress, with allegations also pointing at Richman for chatting with the press about sensitive FBI matters related to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign fallout.

Fast forward to last month, and the original indictment against Comey got tossed out due to a technicality over the lead prosecutor’s appointment being deemed improper.

Now, as the DOJ mulls over a second shot at charging Comey, Richman stepped in with a lawsuit, arguing his constitutional rights were trampled when the government copied and combed through his personal computer without a proper warrant.

Fourth Amendment Concerns Take Center Stage

On Saturday, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly sided -- at least for now -- with Richman, slapping a temporary restraining order on the DOJ to keep those materials under lock and key.

The judge didn’t mince words, stating, “Richman is likely to succeed on the merits of his claim that the government has violated his Fourth Amendment right,” pointing to the unauthorized retention and search of his digital files.

This ruling isn’t just a slap on the wrist; it’s a reminder that even in high-stakes political cases, the Constitution isn’t a suggestion -- it’s the law, no matter how much some in power might wish to sidestep it for expediency.

Court Orders Strict Evidence Safeguards

Judge Kollar-Kotelly went further, directing the DOJ to isolate and secure Richman’s data, barring access without court approval, with a deadline to comply by noon on Monday.

The order is narrow but firm, lasting through December 12 or until further court action, ensuring the status quo holds while deeper arguments are hashed out.

Reading the ruling, it’s clear the court isn’t playing games: “Upon consideration of Petitioner Daniel Richman’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order... the Court concludes that Petitioner Richman is entitled to a narrow temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo,” it states.

Balancing Justice and Constitutional Rights

While some might scoff at this as a delay tactic, let’s not forget that protecting individual rights against government overreach is a cornerstone of what makes America, well, America -- not some progressive fantasy where rules bend for the "greater good."

Comey’s critics, and there are plenty, may grumble at this roadblock, but if the DOJ can’t play by the book, what’s the point of pursuing justice at all?

So, as this legal chess game unfolds, one thing is clear: the fight over Richman’s data isn’t just about Comey -- it’s about whether the government can be trusted to respect the boundaries of power, a principle conservatives have long championed against bureaucratic overreach.