Full Breakdown
New York Appeals Court Orders Release of Ethics Admonition Against Top Federal Prosecutor
By Drooid · · How we work
The Court’s Order and Its Immediate Impact
A five-judge panel of the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department ruled that the public has a First Amendment right to view the formal ethics admonition issued to John A. Sarcone III, the First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York. The panel ordered the Attorney Grievance Committee to provide the admonition by Friday, while keeping Sarcone’s written responses sealed. Sarcone’s counsel requested a stay to allow an appeal in the New York Court of Appeals, arguing one day was insufficient to prepare.
Background of the Disciplinary Complaint
The Campaign for Accountability (CFA) filed the grievance in August 2025, alleging misconduct: a disputed knife-attack claim in a press release, a false residential address on a sworn statement, and the removal of the *Times Union* from the office’s press list after the newspaper reported on those issues.
Sarcone’s Contested Authority as Acting U.S. Attorney
Sarcone’s role as the de facto head of the Northern District has been challenged. In August 2025, the Second Circuit ruled 2-1 that Sarcone was serving unlawfully as Acting U.S. Attorney. He had been appointed to a 120-day interim term by Attorney General Pamela Bondi in March 2025, but judges declined to extend the appointment when it expired in July 2025. The Department of Justice reassigned the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Daniel Hanlon, to a deputy post and designated Sarcone as First Assistant and Special Attorney, citing the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998.
Official Responses
The appellate panel cited a 1928 opinion by former New York Chief Judge Benjamin Cardozo, emphasizing the public interest in transparency. Grievance Committee Chair Elena Jaffe Tastensen confirmed that the committee investigated the complaint, found sufficient grounds for misconduct, and took “appropriate action,” though the nature of that action remains sealed. CFA’s attorney argued that a stay would violate First Amendment rights. The Department of Justice maintained that Sarcone’s appointment complied with the Vacancies Reform Act.
Criticism and Opposition
CFA called the undisclosed disciplinary action a “secret slap on the wrist,” saying secrecy undermines accountability. The group highlighted inconsistencies in Sarcone’s statements about the knife incident, noting surveillance video contradicted his claim of being attacked and that the alleged attempted-murder charge was later reduced to misdemeanor menacing.
Scope of the Northern District Office
Sarcone oversees roughly 50 federal prosecutors across 32 counties, serving about 3.4 million New Yorkers, including Albany, Syracuse, Binghamton and Plattsburgh.
Implications for Lawyer-Discipline Transparency
The decision aligns with a Second Circuit precedent that the First Amendment extends to grievance-committee dispositions, reinforcing a trend toward greater openness in attorney discipline. Legal analysts say the ruling may pressure other state grievance committees to reconsider blanket sealing practices, though the court stressed the decision hinged on the specific misconduct.
What’s Next
Sarcone’s team plans to seek review from the New York Court of Appeals. The grievance committee must now provide the admonition to CFA, and the Department of Justice may need to address questions surrounding Sarcone’s authority and the handling of disciplinary records.