The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit issued a John Sarcone US Attorney appointment ruling on August 21, 2026, saying he was not lawfully serving as acting U.S. attorney when he subpoenaed Letitia James. The 2-1 decision leaves the subpoenas tied to that appointment on unstable ground and sends the dispute toward the Supreme Court.
August 2025 subpoenas
Letitia James was subpoenaed in August 2025 as part of probes into her office's handling of investigations into the National Rifle Association and Mr. Trump. After the subpoenas were issued, she sued to quash them, turning Sarcone’s authority into the central issue before the appeals court.
John Sarcone had been leading the U.S. Attorney's Office in Albany for more than a year. He was initially appointed as interim U.S. attorney in the Northern District of New York last year, after which his 120-day term expired and judges in the district declined to keep him in place.
Pam Bondi and FVRA
Then-Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Sarcone as a special attorney and named him first assistant U.S. attorney in the office. The Justice Department said that move was meant to let him be elevated to acting U.S. attorney for 210 days under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, but the court said that sequence did not fit the law.
Judge Guido Calabresi wrote, “Text, structure, and history all point the same way.” He also wrote, “We hold that only the First Assistant in place when a vacancy arises may become the acting officer under [the Vacancies Act]. Sarcone was not.”
The majority said the FVRA allows elevation only for a deputy already in place when the vacancy opens. Because Sarcone became first assistant months after the U.S. attorney position became vacant, the court said he was not lawfully serving when he secured the subpoenas targeting James.
Supreme Court appeal
A Justice Department spokesperson said the Trump administration intends to appeal the ruling directly to the Supreme Court. Whether the Supreme Court will take the case will decide whether Sarcone’s appointment method can stand and whether the subpoenas issued under it remain valid.
