Federal Appeals Court Rules U.S. Attorney Behind Subpoenas Targeting Letitia James Was Unlawfully Appointed
Key Takeaways
- •The 2nd Circuit ruled 2-1 that John A. Sarcone III was not validly serving as Acting U.S. Attorney when he obtained grand jury subpoenas against New York Attorney General Letitia James.
- •The court affirmed the quashing of the subpoenas and upheld Sarcone's disqualification from future involvement in the investigation because the government offered no argument that the lower court erred on that order.
- •Sarcone issued the subpoenas in August 2025 as part of an effort to charge James with violating the civil rights of Trump and the NRA, an inquiry that ultimately produced no charges.
- •The majority judges were appointed by Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, while the dissenting judge was a Trump appointee.
- •Separate Justice Department mortgage fraud charges against James were previously thrown out after a court found the U.S. attorney leading that case had also been illegally appointed.
A federal appeals court ruled Friday that a U.S. attorney who obtained grand jury subpoenas targeting New York Attorney General Letitia James had been unlawfully appointed, affirming a lower court's decision to quash the subpoenas and dealing a setback to the Justice Department's effort.
In its opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit framed the central question: "This case concerns whether John A. Sarcone III validly served as, and lawfully exercised the duties of, the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York." The court's answer: "We hold that he did not."
The case dates to August 2025, when Sarcone, a Trump loyalist, issued subpoenas to James's office amid civil lawsuits she had filed against President Donald Trump, his family business, and the National Rifle Association. Both Trump and the NRA were found liable, though both maintained they were being targeted for political reasons. Sarcone's subpoenas formed part of an effort to bring charges against James, whom he accused of violating the civil rights of Trump and the NRA. That inquiry ultimately produced no charges.
James filed suit challenging the validity of the subpoenas. A lower court quashed them and disqualified Sarcone from any future involvement in the investigation. The Department of Justice appealed, and the 2nd Circuit sided 2-1 with the original determination.
"We hold that Sarcone was not serving as Acting U.S. Attorney when he obtained the subpoenas," the appeals court wrote, adding that "the general delegation to Sarcone of all the duties of the U.S. Attorney's office was an unlawful" use of authority. Having lacked the power to obtain the subpoenas, the court affirmed their quashing. The panel further noted that the government's appeal never offered an argument as to why the lower court erred in disqualifying Sarcone from future investigations, so that order was upheld as well.
The majority judges were appointed by Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, while a third, dissenting judge had been appointed by Trump.
The ruling adds another legal obstacle in a broader dispute that has followed James since she brought a fraud case against Trump after he was found to have inflated the value of his properties. Trump was initially fined more than $450 million, but the financial penalty was later thrown out on appeal. He later called publicly for consequences, declaring on the 2024 campaign trail that James should "be arrested and punished accordingly." Once back in office, his Department of Justice indicted James on allegations of mortgage fraud. Those charges were thrown out when a court found that the U.S. attorney leading the case — like Sarcone — had been illegally appointed.
