In a blistering 27-page ruling, a U.S. judge granted a motion to quash two subpoenas related to the investigation into Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank.
On Friday, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia concluded that the subpoena was issued for the “improper purpose” of harassing Powell into compliance.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Boasberg explained that Powell had been the target of a months-long campaign under President Donald Trump to force the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates quickly and significantly.
Trump has repeatedly called on Powell to resign as part of his campaign. Powell’s term as Fed chair is scheduled to expire in May.
“There is mounting evidence to suggest that the administration served these subpoenas on the board in order to pressure the chair to either lower rates or vote to resign,” Boasberg wrote in his decision, citing numerous public statements from the president.
Boasberg added that the government’s justification for the subpoena appears hollow.
“The government has produced virtually no evidence to impugn Chairman Powell’s crimes,” he wrote.
“In fact, the justifications are so tenuous and baseless that the court can only conclude that they are pretexts.”
As part of his decision, Boasberg ordered two subpoenas to be unsealed, although some remain redacted.
His ruling was quickly challenged by Jeanine Pirro, the Trump-appointed attorney overseeing the case, who held a brief but combative press conference Friday morning.
She accused Mr. Boasberg of “self-intervening” in grand jury proceedings and offering Mr. Powell immunity from prosecution. She also dismissed Boasberg’s decision as “without legal authority” and added that she would promptly appeal.
“One of the time-honored tools that all prosecutors have to investigate any crime, including cost overruns, is a grand jury subpoena,” Pirro said.
“But today in Washington, an activist judge took that tool away from us.”
Faced with questions from reporters, Pirro denied that the subpoenas were sought for political purposes.
“We focus on the law. We focus on the people of the district. We don’t focus on politics,” she said.
But Boasberg’s decision suggested otherwise, arguing that the Trump administration is leading a campaign to investigate and prosecute political opponents.
Boasberg cited examples such as President Trump’s post calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi to file criminal charges against his critics: New York Attorney General Letitia James, U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff and former FBI Director James Comey.
James and Comey were subsequently indicted and Schiff was placed under investigation.
President Trump has also taken aim at Democratic candidate Lisa Cook, another member of the Federal Reserve Board, accusing her of mortgage fraud. Her case is currently before the Supreme Court.
“In recent years, it has become dangerous to be perceived as an adversary of the president,” Boasberg wrote. “In his second term, President Trump asked the Justice Department to prosecute such people, and the department’s prosecutors listened.”
As the institution responsible for monetary policy in the United States, the Federal Reserve is considered independent from the U.S. political system to avoid its decisions being used for political purposes.
But the Trump administration has embarked on a historic effort to bring various branches of government, even those considered independent, under executive control.
Powell was appointed to head the seven-member Federal Reserve Board in 2017 during President Trump’s first term.
However, since Mr. Trump returned to office in January 2025, he has been urging Mr. Powell to lower interest rates.
That would make lending cheaper, which would flood the economy with money and accelerate businesses that need big loans for projects and expansion.
However, there are downsides to rapidly lowering interest rates. Economists warn that while stock markets may temporarily rise, flooding the economy with money could undermine the value of the dollar and lead to a long-term economic downturn.
Interest rates were raised to combat inflation in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and have steadily fallen over the years.
But President Trump claimed the Fed was slow to cut interest rates, earning the chairman the nickname “Powell Too Late.”
The president has also hinted at the possibility of forcibly removing Powell from office, although he has not announced how he would do so. “If I wanted him out, he would be out in a heartbeat, believe me,” Trump said from the Oval Office last year.
On January 11, the feud between Mr. Trump and Mr. Powell culminated in an unusual public message from the Federal Reserve, which posted a video announcing that its chairman was under investigation.
In the video, Powell explained that the Trump administration’s Justice Department successfully sought two grand jury subpoenas related to his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025.
He said the investigation was related to cost overruns related to renovations to the historic Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington, D.C.
“No one, certainly not the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is above the law,” Powell said. “However, this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the regime’s threats and continued pressure.”
The Fed subsequently filed a motion in federal court seeking to quash the subpoena. Mr. Boasberg’s decision was made in response to that request.
Boasberg explained that federal courts may quash such subpoenas if they are deemed to impose “unreasonable or oppressive” compliance.
“This case asks: Did the prosecutor issue the subpoena for a proper purpose? The court finds that it did not,” Boasberg wrote.
“There is abundant evidence that the primary, if not the only, purpose of the subpoenas is to harass Mr. Powell and pressure the president to yield or resign.”
The Trump administration has faced repeated criticism for allegedly using the justice system for political purposes, and the president’s attacks on Powell have also sparked a backlash from some Republican lawmakers.
Most notably, Sen. Thom Tillis, who is not running for re-election in the 2026 midterm elections, has refused to endorse President Trump’s nominee to replace Powell until the investigation is concluded.
On Friday, Tillis praised Boasberg’s decision to quash the subpoena.
The Republican also warned that if the Trump administration appeals, it will continue to withhold votes for Kevin Warsh, Trump’s nominee to replace Powell.
“This verdict confirms how weak and frivolous Chairman Powell’s criminal investigation is,” he said on social media. “This is nothing short of a failed attack on the Fed’s independence.”
He added that the lawsuit was unlikely to be successful. He said the U.S. attorney’s office should “avoid further embarrassment.”
