In a fiery 27-page decision, a US judge accepted a motion to quash two subpoenas related to an investigation into Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve, the country’s central bank.
On Friday, Judge James Boasberg of the US Court for the District of Columbia concluded that the subpoenas were issued for an “improper purpose”: to harass Powell into compliance.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Powell, Boasberg explained, had been the target of a months-long campaign during Donald Trump’s presidency to force the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates quickly and dramatically.
Trump has repeatedly called on Powell to resign as part of that campaign. Powell’s term as head of the Federal Reserve Board will expire in May.
“A mountain of evidence suggests that the Government served these subpoenas to the Board to pressure its chairman to vote for lower interest rates or resign,” Boasberg wrote, in a decision that cites numerous public statements by the chairman.
Boasberg added that the government’s justifications for the subpoenas seem hollow.
“The Government has presented virtually no evidence to suspect Chairman Powell of a crime,” he wrote.
“In fact, their justifications are so weak and baseless that the Court can only conclude that they are pretextual.”
As part of his decision, Boasberg ordered that the two subpoenas be unsealed, although they remain partially redacted.
His decision was quickly refuted by the U.S. attorney overseeing the case, Trump appointee Jeanine Pirro, who held a combative but brief news conference Friday morning.
He accused Boasberg of “inserting himself” into a grand jury proceeding and offering Powell immunity from prosecution. He also dismissed Boasberg’s decision as “lacking legal authority” and added that it would be quickly appealed.
“One of the old tools that all prosecutors have to investigate any crime, including cost overruns, is a grand jury subpoena,” Pirro said.
“Today, however, in Washington, an activist judge has taken that tool away from us.”
When asked by journalists, Pirro denied that the summons had been requested for political purposes.
“We’re focused on the law. We’re focused on the people of the district. We’re not focused on politics,” he said.
But Boasberg’s decision suggests otherwise, asserting that the Trump administration has led a campaign to investigate and prosecute political rivals.
Boasberg pointed to examples that include posts by Trump calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi to file criminal charges against three of his critics: New York Attorney General Letitia James, U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff and former FBI Director James Comey.
James and Comey subsequently faced accusations, while Schiff was placed under investigation.
Trump also took aim at another member of the Federal Reserve Board, Democratic candidate Lisa Cook, accusing her of alleged mortgage fraud. His case is currently before the Supreme Court.
“Being perceived as the president’s adversary has become risky in recent years,” Boasberg wrote. “In his second term, Trump has urged the Justice Department to prosecute such people, and the Department’s prosecutors have listened.”
As the body in charge of monetary policy in the United States, the Federal Reserve considers itself independent of the American political system, to prevent its decisions from being used for political purposes.
But the Trump administration has embarked on a historic effort to bring different parts of the government (even those considered independent) under executive control.
Powell was nominated to head the seven-member Federal Reserve board during Trump’s first term as president, in 2017.
But since Trump’s return to the presidency in January 2025, he has pressured Powell to slash interest rates.
Doing so would make borrowing cheaper and therefore flood the economy with money, as well as speed up businesses that require borrowing large amounts of money for projects and expansion.
However, reducing interest rates quickly has a downside. Economists warn that while the stock market could see a temporary rally, flooding the economy with money could undermine the value of the dollar, leading to a long-term weakening of the economy.
Interest rates were raised in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic to address inflation, and have been steadily declining since.
But Trump argued that the Federal Reserve Board has been too slow to reduce interest rates, giving its chairman the nickname “Too Late Powell.”
The president has also suggested that he could remove Powell by force, although he has not publicly indicated how. “If I want him out, he’ll get out of there real quick, believe me,” Trump said in the Oval Office last year.
On January 11, the dispute between Trump and Powell came to a head with a rare public message from the Federal Reserve Board, which released a video of its chairman announcing that he was under investigation.
In the video, Powell explained that the Justice Department, under Trump, had successfully requested two grand jury subpoenas regarding his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025.
He said the investigation was related to cost overruns as renovations progressed at the Federal Reserve’s historic headquarters in Washington, DC.
“No one – certainly not even the chairman of the Federal Reserve – is above the law,” Powell said. “But this unprecedented action must be seen in the broader context of the administration’s ongoing threats and pressure.”
The Federal Reserve Board subsequently filed a motion in federal court to have the subpoenas dismissed. Boasberg’s decision comes in response to that request.
Boasberg explained that federal courts can quash such subpoenas if they are deemed to compel compliance that would be “unreasonable or oppressive.”
“The case therefore asks: Did prosecutors issue those subpoenas for a proper purpose? The Court finds that they did not,” Boasberg wrote.
“There is abundant evidence that the dominant (if not sole) purpose of the subpoenas is to harass and pressure Powell into deferring to the President or resigning.”
The Trump administration has repeatedly been criticized for allegedly exploiting the legal system for political purposes, and the president’s attack on Powell even sparked backlash from some members of the Republican Party.
Notably, Senator Thom Tillis, who is not running for reelection in the 2026 midterm elections, has refused to endorse Trump’s nominee to replace Powell until the investigation is closed.
On Friday, Tillis applauded Boasberg for his decision to quash the subpoenas.
The Republican also warned that if the Trump administration appealed, he would continue to withhold his vote for Trump’s pick to succeed Powell, Kevin Warsh.
“This ruling confirms how weak and frivolous Chairman Powell’s criminal investigation is,” he wrote on social media. “It is nothing more than a failed attack on the independence of the Federal Reserve.”
He added that the case is unlikely to be successful. The U.S. Attorney’s Office, he said, “should be spared further embarrassment.”
