Beta The Briev beta is out. Free on iPhone via TestFlight — install it in under a minute.

Join the beta ↗
Briev
Live
Politics

Appeals court rules that Trump ally was not a lawful Acting U.S. Attorney

A federal appeals panel concluded that John A. Sarcone III was not validly serving as Acting U.S. Attorney when he issued subpoenas against New York Attorney General Letitia James.

In a decision released Friday, the 2nd Circuit Court determined that John A. Sarcone III did not lawfully serve as Acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York, invalidating the grand jury subpoenas he issued to Letitia James’s office. The subpoenas, issued in August 2025, were intended to challenge civil suits that found Trump, his family business, and the National Rifle Association liable. The court affirmed the lower court’s ruling that the subpoenas be quashed and that Sarcone be excluded from any future involvement in the investigation.

The appellate panel voted 2-1, with the dissenting judge having been appointed by Trump. The majority judges were appointed by Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. The ruling underscores the limits of the former president’s attempts to use the Department of Justice for political retaliation.

Why it matters

The ruling blocks a key tactic in Trump’s legal strategy to undermine investigations into his conduct.

How the sides frame it

HIGH AGREEMENT

Both camps report the appellate panel’s decision to block John Sarcone III’s appointment and quash his subpoenas, but left-leaning coverage stresses the ruling as a rebuke to former President Trump’s attempts to wield influence, while centrist coverage focuses on the procedural defeat of the Justice Department’s effort to extend his tenure.

LEFT

Frames the decision as a check on former President Trump’s attempts to extend his influence through an unlawful acting-U.S. attorney appointment

CENTER

Frames the decision as a procedural defeat of the Justice Department’s attempt to keep a Trump-appointed prosecutor in place

The left emphasises

  • the ruling underscores the limits of the former president’s attempts
  • the majority judges were appointed by Presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden
  • the dissenting judge had been appointed by Trump

In this story

Sarconeacting U.S. attorneysubpoenaslawfareTrumpLetitia JamesNRA2nd Circuitlegal appointment
Get the beta ↗