A federal judge has blocked subpoenas issued as part of a Justice Department inquiry involving New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that the federal prosecutor who authorized them was not lawfully serving in his role. The decision pauses the subpoenas and removes the prosecutor from further involvement in the matter.
The ruling came from U.S. District Judge Lorna G. Schofield, who determined that John A. Sarcone III, the acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York, exceeded the legal limits of his interim appointment. Because of that, the judge said, subpoenas he issued lacked valid legal authority.
The blocked subpoenas had sought records from James’s office related to civil lawsuits she pursued against former President Donald Trump, his business entities, and the National Rifle Association. Those cases were brought under New York law and resulted in significant legal exposure for the defendants. The federal inquiry has focused on how those state-level cases were handled.
Contextual links Tools readers commonly check next
Under federal law, an acting U.S. attorney may serve for a limited period without Senate confirmation. Court filings show that Sarcone’s initial appointment expired after that statutory window. The Justice Department attempted to keep him in place by assigning additional titles, including “special attorney,” but Judge Schofield said those steps did not comply with governing law.
Advertisement
In her decision, the judge wrote that federal appointment rules cannot be bypassed through administrative maneuvers. As a result, she ruled that Sarcone was serving unlawfully at the time the subpoenas were issued, making them invalid.
The ruling directly affects the inquiry involving James by halting the government’s current attempt to obtain information from her office. It also bars Sarcone from taking further action in the investigation. The decision does not, however, permanently block the inquiry itself.
For the broader public, the case highlights how procedural rules can determine whether government investigations are allowed to move forward. Subpoenas are powerful legal tools, but courts require that they be issued by officials who are properly appointed under the law.
Timeline Key procedural moments
The court issues an order blocking the subpoenas while the appointment question is addressed.
Open court document viewerThe judge finds the acting prosecutor exceeded statutory limits and disqualifies him from the inquiry.
Check federal docket toolsParties are left to consider next steps, including appeal or reissuing demands under a valid appointment.
Track updates via legal alertsJames has previously said the federal inquiry was politically motivated, an allegation the Justice Department has denied. Following the ruling, her office said the decision reinforced the importance of the rule of law. The Justice Department has maintained that its appointment approach was valid.
Next, federal officials could appeal the judge’s decision or attempt to reissue subpoenas through a properly appointed U.S. attorney. Until then, the subpoenas remain blocked, and the inquiry cannot proceed in its current form.
