The Department of Justice is seeking to reverse a decision that invalidated its criminal grand jury subpoenas directed at the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James. Meanwhile, John Sarcone, who holds the disputed title of acting U.S. Attorney, is attempting to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Maurene Comey regarding her termination, despite a judge’s ruling that he is “not lawfully serving” in his position.

Maurene Comey, daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, has initiated legal action after being dismissed from her role as assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York last July, during the Trump administration. She claims her firing was illegal and is pursuing the matter in court in Manhattan.

Sarcone, from the Northern District of New York, is representing the DOJ in this lawsuit because the Southern District’s U.S. Attorney’s Office recused itself. This recusal is linked to Comey’s previous prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein, and her nearly ten-year tenure at the office. Additionally, her father previously served as U.S. attorney and a line prosecutor there.

On Monday, the DOJ submitted a reply memorandum to U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman, arguing for the dismissal of Comey’s lawsuit on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The filing included the names of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and John Sarcone.

John Sarcone appears on the filing to dismiss Maurene Comey’s lawsuit (court documents).

Interestingly, Sarcone’s designation in the document was “Acting United States Attorney.”

Regardless of whether one considers the filing date of January 23 or the docket entry date of February 2, Sarcone continues to present himself as the chief prosecutor for the Northern District of New York, despite the judicial ruling that he is “not lawfully serving” in this role.

As Law&Crime has reported, the subpoenas of Letitia James’ office were issued over the summer as part of the DOJ’s criminal investigation into her civil fraud lawsuit against President Donald Trump and his family business, as well as the Democratic AG’s lawsuit against the NRA.

On Jan. 8, however, Senior U.S. District Judge Lorna Schofield ruled that U.S. Attorney Pam Bondi’s appointment of Sarcone was unlawful and the subpoenas were slapped down.

“Mr. Sarcone is not lawfully serving as Acting U.S. Attorney for the NDNY. His appointment violates the FVRA and the statutes governing U.S. Attorney appointments. Several courts, including the Third Circuit, have recently addressed similar appointment maneuvers and reached the same conclusion,” Schofield wrote, in part referring to dismissals of the DOJ’s criminal cases against James Comey and Letitia James in the Eastern District of Virginia due to Lindsey Halligan’s unlawful interim appointment.

“Because Mr. Sarcone used authority he did not lawfully possess to direct the issuance of the subpoenas, the subpoenas are quashed,” Schofield added, disqualifying Sarcone from “further participation in the underlying criminal investigations.”

Left: U.S. President Donald Trump, left, shakes hands with James Comey, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), during an Inaugural Law Enforcement Officers and First Responders Reception in the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Sunday, Jan. 22, 2017.  (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg). Right: Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey arrives at Federal Court for the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial, on Monday, May 19, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Ted Shaffrey).

The DOJ responded to the adverse ruling two weeks ago by asking Schofield for a stay pending appeal.

The government insisted that Sarcone is lawfully serving by virtue of his titles of special attorney and first assistant U.S. attorney, and that the subpoenas should be revived. After Law&Crime identified a basic error in the filing, the DOJ sought and received permission to file a new memo correcting several typos.

According to the docket, Schofield, a Barack Obama appointee, has not ruled on the DOJ’s motion for a stay as of Tuesday.

It’s reminiscent of the situation in Virginia that prompted a judge to call out Lindsey Halligan for using the U.S. attorney title in court filings even after the dismissals of the Comey and James prosecutions.

U.S. District Judge David J. Novak, a Trump appointee, had ordered the government to answer why Halligan identified herself on an indictment as U.S. attorney “despite a binding Court Order,” which “found that the ‘appointment of Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney violated 28 U.S.C. § 546 and the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.’”

The DOJ said the judge was running an “inquisition,” but Halligan ultimately stepped aside on Jan. 20 as judges in the EDVA began the process for replacing her.

Novak, for his part, said Halligan was engaged in a “charade,” where she was “masquerading” as the U.S. attorney and “in direct defiance of binding court orders[.]”