Federal prosecutors have opened a new investigation into New York Attorney General Letitia James, focusing on financial transactions with her longtime hairdresser, Iyesata Marsh, who faces unrelated identity theft charges in Louisiana, according to a New York Times report citing sources with knowledge of the matter.
The inquiry, in its early stages, involves prosecutors seeking to speak with Marsh about transactions with James or her campaign. James has not been accused of wrongdoing. Her attorney, Abbe Lowell, stated that the probe represents another failed political vendetta by the Trump-led Department of Justice (DOJ), noting:
“Like their earlier attempts, this attack on Ms. James is doomed to fail.”
This development follows a series of DOJ-led investigations against James, a Democrat who secured a $355 million civil fraud judgment against former President Donald Trump in 2024—a ruling that preserved the fraud finding despite a state appeals court voiding the penalty in 2025. Critics, including James’s allies, argue the probes are retaliatory, given her role as one of Trump’s key legal adversaries.
Previous investigations have consistently failed due to procedural flaws. In October 2025, James was indicted on two counts of mortgage fraud in the Eastern District of Virginia, stemming from alleged misleading information on documents for a 2020 home purchase in Norfolk. The case was dismissed without prejudice in November 2025 after U.S. District Judge Mark S. Davis ruled that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan—a Trump appointee—was unlawfully appointed. Prosecutors appealed the ruling, but a federal grand jury rejected reindictment attempts twice in December 2025, citing insufficient evidence.
Separately, the DOJ launched a civil rights investigation in August 2025 into whether James’s fraud case against Trump deprived him of his rights. Subpoenas were issued for records on her lawsuits against Trump and the National Rifle Association.
However, on January 8, 2026, U.S. District Judge Lorna G. Schofield ruled that the lead prosecutor, John Sarcone—another Trump appointee—was unlawfully serving as acting U.S. Attorney in Albany, quashing the subpoenas and blocking his involvement. The DOJ claimed “ample evidence” that politics motivated James’s actions, but the case stalled.
These outcomes align with a broader pattern identified in reports from outlets like the Brennan Center for Justice and Protect Democracy, which documented the Trump DOJ’s politicization of investigations against perceived enemies. A 2025 Brennan Center report highlighted dismantled internal checks on abuses, while Protect Democracy’s assessment noted key questions for determining improper politicization, such as selective targeting. Grand juries’ refusals and judicial dismissals on appointment grounds have fueled arguments that the probes lack merit and serve as retaliation for James’s successful civil actions against Trump.
The latest inquiry, tied to Marsh’s Louisiana indictment for fraud in a vehicle purchase, fits this narrative. Lowell described the DOJ’s efforts as “desperation,” pointing to repeated failures. Political analysts, including those cited in Politico and The Hill, suggest the pattern reflects “what tyranny looks like,” with allies rushing to condemn the actions as politically motivated.
As the DOJ appeals prior dismissals, the possibility of political motivation remains central, given the timing and James’s history of clashing with Trump. No charges have stuck, and two grand juries have declined indictments, underscoring procedural and evidentiary hurdles.
