John Sarcone is, for all intents and purposes, running the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York, even though he is very much NOT the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York. The Trump administration lists him as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney of that office, and takes the position that this title allows him to assume all the authority of the top job even though the effort to legally give him the real job fizzled.
It’s “the assistant to the regional manager” schtick, just with a bunch of arguably void criminal indictments.
Beyond his dubious claim to his job, Sarcone’s been a disastershambles since showing up on the job. Arguably the most disturbing episode of his tenure involved his office rapidly putting out an official Justice Department press release under the headline “United States Attorney John A. Sarcone III Attacked by a Salvadorian National with a Knife in Downtown Albany.” The man, per the release, “lunged at Sarcone while brandishing a knife and yelling aggressively in a foreign language” and was charged with attempted second-degree murder.
Anyway… none of that happened.
The surveillance video came out and did not support Sarcone’s harrowing account. The attempted murder charge went away, but for good measure the whole affair revealed that Sarcone’s stated address within the district was a boarded up building.
A New York grievance committee then looked into whether using federal law enforcement press releases to make extra-judicial and prejudicial statements about a serious criminal matter amounted to professional misconduct. After deciding that it did, the grievance committee refused to let the public know what it decided to do about it, claiming at the time that:
“We regret that we cannot be more specific about the nature of the action taken and in accordance with Judiciary Law §90(10) and Atty. Disc. Rules §1240.18, all papers, records and documents of a disciplinary investigation and proceeding are sealed and deemed private and confidential,” [Committee’s chair Elena Jaffe Tastensen] added.
The Appellate Division has now unanimously disagreed. In a per curiam decision, the five-justice panel ordered the Attorney Grievance Committee to divulge the admonition it imposed on Sarcone back in April, directing “that AGC provide a copy thereof to [the Campaign for Accountabilty] forthwith.”
The Campaign for Accountability filed the original grievance in August 2025, listing among the ethical problems the knife story, the boarded up home address, and Sarcone’s decision to boot the Times Union from his office’s media list after it reported on all of the above. And that’s all without getting into how he’s stayed on the job long after his legal right to it evaporated.
In April, the committee told complainants it found “a sufficient basis for a finding of professional misconduct,” took some action, and declared the matter “concluded.” CfA’s Michelle Kuppersmith called it “a secret slap on the wrist.”
By the time the case reached the courts, even the grievance committee had given up on the idea that the petition proceedings should remain sealed:
AGC has conceded that it cannot advance a good-faith claim that its adjudicatory disposition should remain confidential.
Though don’t necessarily read that as a gratuitous change of heart on the part of the committee. In July, the Second Circuit decided Civil Rights Corps v. LaSalle, a challenge brought by people who’d filed grievances against New York prosecutors, and held that the First Amendment right of access reaches a grievance committee’s final dispositions.
Which is all to say that Sarcone’s big argument that disclosure “would mark the end of all private discipline in New York” was — like his claim to a federal government position — several months late.
Of note, the court rejected the argument that the files should be released on the basis of Sarcone’s role as a public official. According to the court, “the misconduct in question did not arise out of respondent’s formal execution of his public duties” — which is true to the extent he legally has no public duties, though the whole thing arrived on the public’s doorstep because Sarcone put out an official U.S. Attorney’s Office release.
But the First Amendment argument overcame everything else. The court reminded everyone that “attorney disciplinary proceedings have historically taken place in a public forum” and that “the primary concern of a disciplinary proceeding is the protection of the public in its reliance on the integrity and responsibility of the legal profession.”
And while Sarcone’s continued presence in the Northern District office also undermines the public’s reliance on the integrity and responsibility of the legal profession, getting some transparency about his professional misconduct goes a small way toward repairing the damage.
Earlier: Another Day, Another Fake MAGA Prosecutor
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.
The post Court Orders Grievance Committee To Stop Hiding Punishment It Imposed On Fake U.S. Attorney John Sarcone appeared first on Above the Law.
Recent Comments