Boasberg lowers boom on Jeanine Pirro
Left: U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, stands for a portrait at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, March 16, 2023. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post via AP, File). Right: U.S. D.C. Attorney Jeanine Pirro at a press conference detailing the arrest of Zubayr al-Bakoush, a person connected to the 2012 U.S. Embassy attack in Benghazi, at the Department of Justice building in Washington, D.C., on Friday, February 6, 2026. (Photo by Annabelle Gordon/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images).
A federal judge has thrown out grand jury subpoenas issued by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro targeting Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, ruling that the Justice Department failed to present meaningful evidence suggesting Powell committed a crime.
Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg wrote in his opinion that the government “produced essentially zero evidence” to justify the subpoenas, even though prosecutors were given the opportunity to present their evidence privately to the court.
Boasberg began his ruling by acknowledging the well-known tensions between President Donald Trump and Powell. The president has publicly criticized Powell, calling him “one of the dumbest and most destructive people in government,” accusing him of having “real mental problems,” and describing him as “too late” in lowering interest rates. Trump has also made clear he wanted action taken regarding Powell’s leadership.
In December, Trump threatened to file a lawsuit accusing Powell of “gross incompetence” related to oversight of expensive renovations to Federal Reserve buildings. Around the same time, the administration attempted to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook following a mortgage fraud referral submitted by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, a Trump appointee.
By January, Powell publicly disclosed that Pirro’s office had served the Federal Reserve with grand jury subpoenas tied to the possibility of criminal charges related to his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee the previous June. Powell said his testimony partly addressed a long-term project involving the renovation of historic Federal Reserve office buildings. He described the subpoenas as unprecedented and said they occurred amid broader pressure and threats from the administration.
The ruling also referenced other recent legal conflicts connected to the administration. President Trump had publicly called for investigations and prosecutions of political opponents, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey. The Justice Department, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, removed internal resistance and assigned prosecutors to pursue those cases.
However, those efforts ultimately fell apart. Charges against Comey and James collapsed, and attempts to subpoena James’ office over its investigations involving Trump were also rejected by courts in recent weeks.
Judge Boasberg said the Powell subpoenas appeared to fit a similar pattern. He also pointed to Pirro’s earlier decision not to pursue charges against Senator Mark Kelly and other Democrats who had advised military personnel that they could refuse unlawful orders.
In his written opinion, Boasberg stated that individuals seen as adversaries of the president have increasingly faced legal scrutiny. He noted that during Trump’s second term the president urged the Justice Department to prosecute figures such as Comey, Representative Adam Schiff, and Letitia James. According to the judge, prosecutors soon brought charges against Comey and James and opened an investigation into Schiff.
Boasberg wrote that the Justice Department’s move against Powell followed the same trend. He dismissed the government’s explanations for the subpoenas as pretextual.
The judge emphasized that prosecutors refused to provide additional evidence to justify the subpoenas, even when the court offered them the chance to submit materials privately. In other recent cases involving challenges to subpoenas, the Justice Department had supplied such confidential evidence to demonstrate suspected wrongdoing. In this case, however, prosecutors declined.
Because of that, Boasberg said the court was left with no convincing reason to believe investigators were examining legitimate evidence of a crime rather than targeting a specific official.
He also criticized the government’s reasoning in sharp terms, suggesting the only apparent basis for suspicion was simply that Powell testified before Congress. Boasberg wrote that using that logic would be similar to investigating someone for mail fraud simply because they once mailed a letter.
Pirro quickly announced that the Justice Department would challenge the ruling on appeal. She accused Boasberg, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, of acting as an activist judge.
Pirro said taxpayers are frustrated by what she described as a lack of transparency surrounding Federal Reserve spending and argued the ruling prevented investigators from using grand jury subpoenas to examine the central bank’s actions. She said the Justice Department intends to pursue the matter further.
Following the decision, several Republican lawmakers called for Boasberg to be impeached and removed from the bench. At the same time, a separate effort by the Justice Department to discipline the judge over earlier rulings against the administration did not succeed.
About Post Author
