New York Attorney General Letitia James has filed a supplemental brief with a federal court arguing that subpoenas issued by acting U.S. Attorney John Sarcone are invalid due to procedural defects in his appointment.
The filing, directed to Senior U.S. District Judge Lorna Schofield, comes ahead of a Thursday hearing focused solely on whether Sarcone’s purported authority as acting U.S. Attorney undermines the subpoenas.
James’ motion to quash, first filed in August, targets subpoenas tied to her civil fraud lawsuits against President Donald Trump, his family business, and the NRA.
In her latest filing, James noted that Sarcone’s appointment mirrors past cases where interim or acting U.S. Attorneys appointed by former Attorney General Pam Bondi were invalidated by the courts. She cited rulings against Lindsey Halligan and Alina Habba, both of whom were removed from acting positions after courts found their appointments violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
“The only appropriate remedy is granting the motion to quash,” James wrote, highlighting that Sarcone personally authorized, obtained, and delivered the subpoenas while holding a title she contends he was not legally entitled to use. The NYAG characterized the subpoenas as “revenge” for her office’s enforcement actions against Trump and allies.
Sarcone, appointed by Bondi in February, has no prior prosecutorial experience and is a known supporter of Trump. Critics have noted his previous public statements describing the Democratic Party as “evil.”
Despite concerns raised by James, the Department of Justice maintains that Sarcone’s appointment was proper, asserting that his role as Special Attorney provided him authority to conduct grand jury proceedings even if his acting U.S. Attorney title were questioned.
The controversy underscores ongoing legal battles over the limits of DOJ appointment powers and the enforcement of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Courts have increasingly scrutinized efforts by Bondi to extend the authority of interim U.S. Attorneys, ruling that delegating powers to act indefinitely outside the standard presidential appointment and Senate confirmation process is unlawful.
Thursday’s hearing is expected to focus exclusively on the narrow question of whether Sarcone’s status as acting U.S. Attorney invalidates the subpoenas, a decision that could have significant implications for the broader Trump-era legal investigations in New York.
