EXCLUSIVE: Trump Probe Blow — Appeals Court Blocks Grand Jury Subpoenas for Letitia James' Files After Ruling Top Prosecutor Was Illegally Installed
Donald Trump has been dealt a fresh legal blow in the battle involving New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Aug. 21 2026, Published 3:45 p.m. ET
Donald Trump has been dealt a fresh legal blow after a federal appeals court upheld the decision to kill grand jury subpoenas demanding files from New York Attorney General Letitia James' investigations into the president and the National Rifle Association, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
According to court documents obtained by Radar, the Second Circuit ruled Friday that John A. Sarcone III was not lawfully serving as Acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York when he obtained the explosive subpoenas.
Letitia James Fought Back Against the Subpoenas
James' office accused federal prosecutors of retaliation and sought to have the grand jury subpoenas thrown out.
The subpoenas, served on James' office in August 2025, demanded "any and all documents" and communications relating to the attorney general's cases involving Trump and the NRA.
Sarcone identified himself solely as the "Acting United States Attorney" when obtaining them – despite his 120-day term as Interim U.S. Attorney having already expired.
James' office fought back, accusing federal prosecutors of issuing the subpoenas in retaliation and with the intent to harass her and her office.
Her lawyers also argued the demands were overbroad, burdensome, sought privileged information and intruded on New York's sovereignty. However, the appeals court did not rule on whether the retaliation allegations were true. Instead, the judges concluded Sarcone simply lacked the legal authority to obtain the subpoenas in the first place.
John Sarcone's Authority Comes Under Fire
John A. Sarcone III was ruled not to have been lawfully serving as Acting U.S. Attorney when he obtained the subpoenas.
Sarcone had initially been appointed Interim U.S. Attorney before his term expired. The Justice Department subsequently appointed him First Assistant U.S. Attorney and designated him a Special Attorney, granting him sweeping authority to conduct criminal and civil proceedings, including grand jury matters.
But the Second Circuit ruled the maneuver did not make him a lawful Acting U.S. Attorney. Under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, the majority found, only a First Assistant already holding that position when a vacancy arises can automatically step into the acting role.
Because Sarcone was installed as First Assistant after the U.S. Attorney vacancy had already occurred, the court found he did not qualify.
Trump's Legal Battle Takes Center Stage
The subpoenas sought records connected to James' civil fraud case involving Trump, as well as her office's NRA case.
The judges also rejected the government’s fallback argument that the Attorney General could give Sarcone the necessary authority through delegation.
The court concluded the sweeping delegation effectively made Sarcone Acting U.S. Attorney "in all but name" and amounted to an unlawful circumvention of federal vacancies law. The clash strikes at the heart of James' years-long legal war with Trump.
As Radar previously reported, James brought the blockbuster civil fraud lawsuit accusing Trump and his business of falsely inflating the value of assets while seeking favorable terms from lenders. Trump has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and attacked James and the case.
Appeals Court Leaves Lower Court Ruling Intact
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The Second Circuit upheld the decision quashing the subpoenas.
The now-quashed subpoenas sought documents and communications connected to that Trump case as well as James' separate investigation of the NRA.
James' office sued the NRA and several of its senior executives in 2020, accusing them of mishandling its assets and misappropriating charitable funds for personal use.
A lower court previously threw out the subpoenas and barred Sarcone from further involvement in the investigations that prompted them. The Second Circuit has now affirmed both decisions.
The appeals court said the government failed to sufficiently challenge Sarcone's disqualification, leaving him barred from further involvement in the investigations at issue.
