Prosecutor Who Subpoenaed Letitia James’s Office Was Illegally Appointed, Appeals Court Says

First assistant U.S. Attorney John A. Sarcone III speaks during a press conference in Albany, at the U.S. Courthouse in Albany, New York, on Aug. 20, 2026. Cindy Schultz/Reuters

An appeals court has ruled that John Sarcone was not validly appointed as acting U.S. Attorney for New York when he issued subpoenas to the state’s attorney general’s office.

Sarcone subpoenaed New York Attorney General Letitia James’s office last August as part of a probe into cases her office brought against President Donald Trump and the National Rifle Association.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled on Aug. 21 that since Trump’s administration had invalidly installed Sarcone as U.S. attorney, the grand jury subpoenas he issued were also invalid.

“We disagree ‌with ⁠the court’s decision, and intend to take this case to the Supreme Court,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in a statement.

Sarcone had been acting as temporary U.S. attorney since his predecessor left office in February 2025, but the law only allowed him to hold that position for 120 days—unless he was confirmed by the Senate.

In July 2025, that time had passed, so the Trump administration appointed him as first acting assistant to the U.S. Attorney, theoretically allowing him to automatically move into the still-vacant U.S. Attorney slot for another 210 days.

The government also named Sarcone as special attorney “to conduct in the Northern District of New York any kind of legal proceedings, civil or criminal, including Grand Jury proceedings, which United States Attorneys are authorized to conduct.”

Those two appointments meant he was serving as acting U.S. Attorney “indefinitely,” Sarcone told the Chief Judge of New York’s Northern District.

The appeals court, upholding a lower court ruling, disagreed.

In a 2–1 decision, the court ruled that, under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, the first assistant automatically moves into the top spot only if he was in place when the vacancy opened.

Aside from contending that Sarcone was acting U.S. Attorney, the government argued that he had authority to issue the subpoenas under his special attorney title.

The Second Circuit rejected that too, ruling that the same law “forbids” such delegation of power.

“Under that reading, whenever the Executive wished to fill a vacancy free of the FVRA’s limits, all the Executive would need to do would be to delegate all the powers of the vacant office to that handpicked individual without calling him the ‘acting’ officer,” the court said.

“For U.S. Attorneys, that means the Attorney General could install any attorney to serve as the Acting U.S. Attorney, regardless of whether that person has been confirmed by the Senate for another office or possessed any agency experience.”

The Epoch Times reached out to Sarcone and James’s offices for comment on the ruling.

Reuters contributed to this report.