Judge Blocks DOJ Subpoenas in Powell Probe

Federal Judge James Boasberg blocked subpoenas issued by the Justice Department (DOJ) in its criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. The judge ruled there was 'no evidence' to justify the probe, agreeing with Powell's assertion that it was a pretext to pressure the Fed on interest rates.

The subpoenas, issued in January, sought information about cost overruns related to renovations of the Federal Reserve's headquarters and Powell's June 2025 testimony before the Senate Banking Committee. Boasberg wrote that 'the government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President.' The ruling also noted that the subpoenas' primary purpose appeared to be harassing and pressuring Powell, either to yield to presidential demands or resign.

US Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who initiated the probe, criticized the ruling, calling it 'wrong on its face' and vowing to appeal. She argued that the judge had improperly interfered with the grand jury process. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) praised the decision, stating it confirmed how weak and frivolous the criminal investigation of Powell was.

The case has raised concerns about political pressure on the central bank's independence. This marked the most public clash between a president and the Federal Reserve in its history. The investigation has also delayed Senate consideration of Kevin Warsh, President Donald Trump's pick to replace Powell when his term ends May 15.

Attorneys for Jerome Powell raised the possibility he might remain as a member of the central bank's board of governors after his term as chair ends in May, according to documents unsealed on Friday. This precedent-breaking decision was discussed during a January meeting with the Department of Justice. Powell's attorneys suggested that if he were still under investigation, he would not leave the Board when his term as Chair expires.

The documents also revealed that Powell's attorneys argued President Donald Trump does not have enough votes in the Senate to confirm a new Board Chair. This statement was made in the context of opposing the DOJ's subpoenas. The Fed had no comment about the material in the unsealed documents, while Justice Department attorneys regarded the comments from Powell's lawyers as an attempt to inject politics into the discussion.

In a fiery 27-page decision, Judge Boasberg concluded that the subpoenas were issued for an 'improper purpose': to harass Powell into compliance. He cited numerous public statements from President Trump calling for Powell to step down and lower interest rates rapidly and dramatically. The judge also noted that the government's justifications for the subpoenas seem hollow, with essentially zero evidence to suspect Powell of a crime.

Boasberg ordered the unsealing of the two subpoenas, though they remain redacted in part. Pirro accused Boasberg of 'inserting himself' into a grand jury proceeding and offering Powell immunity from prosecution. She also brushed aside Boasberg's decision as being 'without legal authority', adding that it would be appealed swiftly.

Boasberg's decision suggests the Trump administration has led a campaign to investigate and prosecute political rivals, pointing to examples including posts from Trump calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi to file criminal charges against three of his critics: New York Attorney General Letitia James, US Senator Adam Schiff, and former FBI director James Comey. Boasberg wrote that 'Being perceived as the President's adversary has become risky in recent years.'

The Federal Reserve is considered independent from the US political system to avoid its decisions being wielded for political aims. However, the Trump administration has embarked on a historic effort to bring different parts of government under executive control.