Trump US Attorney John Sarcone Barred From Investigating Letitia James After Appeals Court Ruling
A federal appeals court has ruled that Trump-picked U.S. Attorney John Sarcone cannot continue serving as the acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York, dealing another legal setback to the Trump administration’s controversial method of installing prosecutors without Senate confirmation.
The 2-1 decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling that found Sarcone’s appointment unlawful. The ruling also prevents him from participating in the federal investigation into New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of President Donald Trump’s most prominent political opponents.
The decision is the latest in a series of federal court rulings questioning the Trump administration’s approach to filling vacant U.S. attorney positions. The Justice Department has argued that its process is legally permissible, but several federal appeals courts have now rejected that interpretation.
Sarcone had been serving as the acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York. The Justice Department had used a process in which lawyers were placed in positions such as first assistant U.S. attorney and then given authority to serve as acting U.S. attorneys.
The appeals court majority rejected that approach.
The judges concluded that the Federal Vacancies Reform Act does not allow the administration to simply designate a new first assistant after a vacancy occurs and then use that appointment to bypass the normal Senate confirmation process.
According to the majority, only the person who was already serving as first assistant when the U.S. attorney position became vacant can automatically assume the acting role under the relevant succession provisions.
The court also noted that Sarcone’s time as acting U.S. attorney had exceeded the 210-day limit permitted under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Because President Trump had not submitted a nominee to the Senate for the position, the court concluded that Sarcone could no longer lawfully serve as the head of the office.
The ruling has particular significance because of the investigation involving Letitia James.
James has been a prominent critic of Trump and previously brought a civil fraud case against him and his company in New York. Trump’s administration subsequently pursued a federal investigation into James, creating a politically sensitive clash between the president and one of his most prominent opponents.
The court’s decision means Sarcone can no longer participate in that investigation in his capacity as acting U.S. attorney.
The ruling does not necessarily end the underlying investigation. Instead, it addresses who has the legal authority to serve as the U.S. attorney overseeing the office and exercising the powers associated with that position.
The case is also significant because of the broader dispute over presidential control of federal prosecutors.
The Trump administration has argued that its method is necessary to ensure that U.S. attorney offices can continue functioning when vacancies occur. The Justice Department has strongly defended the appointments and said it plans to appeal the latest decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Second Circuit decision follows similar legal challenges elsewhere in the country.
Earlier this week, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Sigal Chattah was unlawfully serving as U.S. attorney for Nevada. The Justice Department has indicated that it will appeal that ruling as well. In another case, the Third Circuit previously concluded that Alina Habba was not lawfully appointed as U.S. attorney for New Jersey.
The cases have produced different consequences depending on how the challenged prosecutors participated in criminal matters.
In situations where an improperly appointed U.S. attorney acted alone, courts have dismissed indictments or subpoenas connected to the disputed authority. In other cases, prosecutors have been able to preserve legal actions when properly appointed assistant U.S. attorneys participated in the proceedings.
That distinction could become important as the Justice Department considers how to proceed with investigations and cases affected by the appointment disputes.
Judge Michael Park, a Trump appointee to the Second Circuit, dissented from Friday’s decision. Park agreed with the government’s interpretation that any first assistant could become acting U.S. attorney, subject to the statutory time limitations.
The majority, however, took a narrower view of the statute and emphasized Congress’s restrictions on executive appointments.
The ruling represents a significant challenge to the administration’s strategy for installing prosecutors without going through the Senate confirmation process. It also illustrates the growing role of federal courts in determining how far the executive branch can go when filling senior Justice Department positions.
For Sarcone, the immediate consequence is clear: he can continue serving as first assistant U.S. attorney but cannot continue functioning as the acting head of the Northern District of New York under the disputed appointment.
For the Justice Department, the next step is expected to be an appeal to the Supreme Court. That could place the legality of the administration’s broader appointment strategy before the nation’s highest court.
The John Sarcone Letitia James dispute therefore extends beyond one prosecutor or one investigation. It is part of a larger constitutional and statutory fight over presidential appointment power, Senate confirmation and the independence of federal prosecutors.
Until the Supreme Court or Congress provides a definitive resolution, similar disputes could continue to affect U.S. attorney offices across the country.
About the Author
