Former FBI Director James Comey’s seashell case has been delayed until 2027 after a North Carolina judge granted his request.
U.S. District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan postponed Comey’s September 30 arraignment in New Bern until January 2027.
The trial had been scheduled for October 21, but it will no longer begin this year.
Comey’s lawyers requested a February trial if the case survives several pending motions seeking dismissal.
Prosecutors did not oppose the continuance and said they were prepared to proceed if Flanagan rejected it.
Flanagan cited “the gravity of the charges, pending motions,” and the defense’s need for additional preparation time.
She also found the continuance outweighed the public’s and defendant’s interests in a speedier trial.
Advertisement
The case stems from Comey’s May 15, 2025, Instagram post showing seashells arranged as “86 47.”
Prosecutors contend “86” can mean eliminating someone, while “47” referred to Trump as the 47th president.
Comey said he did not understand the arrangement as violent when he posted the photograph.
“It never occurred to me,” Comey said after deleting the image amid accusations it threatened President Trump.
He added, “I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”
A North Carolina federal grand jury indicted Comey on April 28, 2026, on two felony counts.
Count one alleges he knowingly and willfully threatened the president’s life or bodily safety under federal law.
Count two alleges he transmitted an interstate communication that contained a threat to injure another person.
The indictment says a reasonable recipient familiar with the circumstances would understand the image as a serious threat.
Prosecutors later wrote that “an objective viewer” could read Comey’s message as “Kill President Trump.”
Advertisement
Comey’s attorneys argue “86” ordinarily means removing, ejecting, or refusing something, rather than killing someone.
They maintain the post was First Amendment-protected political expression and not a legally punishable true threat.
Comey filed July motions seeking dismissal for lack of a true threat and alleged vindictive prosecution.
His lawyers also contend the case represents selective prosecution driven by Trump’s longstanding hostility toward the former FBI director.
The Justice Department rejects that claim, saying North Carolina prosecutors pursued the case independently without improper presidential pressure.
Advertisement
Prosecutors wrote Comey’s vindictive-prosecution argument “falters from the start” because he lacks evidence of prosecutorial animus.
Government filings say Comey’s wife texted him a definition of “86” shortly before the Instagram post appeared.
That definition described “86” as meaning “to get rid of or refuse service,” according to prosecutors.
The government also questioned Comey’s account that he simply encountered the shell arrangement while walking on the beach.
Prosecutors said the shells were approximately four miles from the beachfront property where Comey was staying.
They also cited Comey’s then-forthcoming novel “FDR Drive,” released shortly after the controversial social media post.
The novel involves a prosecutor pursuing a social media figure whose rhetoric allegedly inspires supporters to attack political adversaries.
Prosecutors argue that the storyline bears on whether Comey understood how coded political language could be interpreted.
Advertisement
Comey’s defense says the government is stretching ordinary speech into a criminal threat and improperly politicizing prosecution.
His attorneys also accused investigators of misleading courts, omitting exculpatory information, and improperly surveilling Comey and his wife.
The government denies wrongdoing and defends both the investigation and indictment as lawful exercises of prosecutorial authority.
Comey’s lawyers additionally seek grand-jury materials and suppression of evidence connected to disputed investigative steps.
Flanagan has not ruled on those dismissal motions, which remain central to whether any trial occurs.
The seashell indictment is separate from an earlier federal prosecution brought against Comey during Trump’s second term.
A judge dismissed that earlier case in November 2025 after finding prosecutor Lindsey Halligan had been unlawfully appointed.
That dismissal was without prejudice, although Comey’s lawyers argued the statute of limitations prevented valid refiling.
Comey led the FBI from 2013 until Trump fired him in May 2017 during Trump’s first term.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
