Court blocks DOJ attempt to revive Powell subpoenas, says claims 'do not come close'
WASHINGTON, DC: A federal judge in Washington, DC, on Friday, April 3, has rejected a request by prosecutors to reconsider a ruling that blocked subpoenas tied to an investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
The decision reaffirms the court’s earlier finding that the subpoenas lacked sufficient legal basis.
The Justice Department had sought to revive the subpoenas as part of a broader probe into Powell’s testimony and the Federal Reserve’s renovation project. The ruling leaves open the possibility of an appeal to a higher court.
Judge upholds decision to quash subpoenas
Chief Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia denied the Justice Department’s motion to reconsider his earlier ruling that invalidated subpoenas issued to the Federal Reserve.
The subpoenas were part of a criminal investigation into Jerome Powell related to his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025 regarding renovations at the central bank’s Washington headquarters.
In his order, Boasberg stated that nothing in the government’s request for reconsideration “changes the Court’s view of the appropriate legal framework, most of which the Government does not even contest.”
He added that the government’s arguments “do not come close” to persuading the court that a different conclusion was justified.
The judge had previously determined that the Justice Department failed to present evidence suggesting Powell had committed a crime. In that earlier ruling,
Boasberg said the government “has produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime,” concluding that the subpoenas were not supported by a valid legal foundation.
The subpoenas, issued in January, were linked to a grand jury investigation into Powell’s statements about a long-running renovation of Federal Reserve facilities.
Powell disclosed at the time that the inquiry could potentially lead to criminal charges, though no indictment has been filed.
DOJ response, criticism, and possible appeal
The Justice Department, represented by US Attorney Jeanine Pirro, had sought both to appeal the initial ruling and to have Boasberg reconsider his decision.
In sealed proceedings, attorneys for the Federal Reserve successfully argued that the subpoenas should be quashed, prompting the judge to later unseal his opinion.
Following the earlier decision, Pirro criticized the ruling, calling Boasberg an “activist judge” and arguing that his conclusions were “untethered to the law.”
Despite those objections, the court declined to reverse course, maintaining that the legal arguments presented by the government were insufficient.
The dispute centers on Powell’s testimony about the Federal Reserve’s building renovations, an issue that has drawn political scrutiny.
Powell has also faced criticism from President Donald Trump over monetary policy decisions, particularly his reluctance to aggressively cut interest rates.
Powell has indicated he does not intend to step down from his position amid the ongoing investigation. The probe has not resulted in any criminal charges to date, and the court’s latest ruling further limits the scope of the Justice Department’s inquiry.
